Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

MN hunters sue Scentlok

Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

It will certainly be interesting to watch this one unfold.

I have spent a bundle on Scent lok/scent blocker over the years and I can't honestly say that it made any difference that could be proven. Not that I would ever ask for any retribution.

The info is out there for a person to make there own educated decision with their purchases.


I purchased my last Scent Blocker suit last year, the Dream Season edition, and it looks like it is 5+ years old already. Stitching was very poor at best. Comfortable and quiet but certainly not durable.

I have switched to Sitka Gear this year and have been quit happy thus far. I now only plan on buying garments that I feel will stand the test of time.

The most durable pants I have ever owned were made by Pella at least 10 years ago. If in the area you should check them out.

I will also be checking into Grey Wolf Woolens, if I can ever see some in person.

Pretty random thoughts above. Sorry for being so incoherent.
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

Well, you guys have definitly changed the way I think, I will now quit my job and find employment elsewhere.

I am in seed sales, and with this position, I have to be the most competitive brand out there.

So for example, I carry a certain seed brand that is in 290 plots across IA. If that seed wins 280 out of the 290 plots, to me it may be a good one. So when I go to farmer joe and say that I can out perform brand a with brand b and have some "test" to prove it, I better be on my game, because if it yields lower, than I will probably get may ass sued off for false statements.

I just love this society we live in. Its not "my" fault, its someone elses fault that my scent lok didn't work.

Are these guys serious, are they sheoples? Did scent lok MAKE them buy the suit. This is freakin stupid, do some research before you buy.
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

It will be interesting to see how it all turns out.
Personally, I believe this stuff works
grin.gif
It gives me a boost confidence.
grin.gif


552Bob.jpg
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
I can understand trying to get the company to stop producing the product but suing the Seller?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not because they are selling it, it's because they are putting their name on it. Meaning they have used the ALS products with their name on it. Both Cabela's and Gander do it.
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
I am in seed sales, and with this position, I have to be the most competitive brand out there.

So for example, I carry a certain seed brand that is in 290 plots across IA. If that seed wins 280 out of the 290 plots, to me it may be a good one. So when I go to farmer joe and say that I can out perform brand a with brand b and have some "test" to prove it, I better be on my game, because if it yields lower, than I will probably get may ass sued off for false statements.

I just love this society we live in. Its not "my" fault, its someone elses fault that my scent lok didn't work.

Are these guys serious, are they sheoples? Did scent lok MAKE them buy the suit. This is freakin stupid, do some research before you buy.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of this is comparing apples to oranges. This suit would be more comparable to you if you were saying that all your corn would grow 10 feet tall and produce 800 bushels per acre in any soil, yet ther way no way to prove how many bushels it produced so everyone had to totally go on your word. Thanskfully it's easy to prove how many BPU your corn is producing so if you don't lie about it your job is secure.

A lot of people seem to think this is based on opinion, which is what the makers of scent lok want you to think.

Bottom line in this lawsuit is trying to prove this:

1) The product has been scientifically proven not to work. In fact, it CANNOT work.
2) Scent Lok knows it doesn't work and has still continued to claim that it works.
3) Therefore, they have defrauded the public and taken their money based on what they have known for a long time is a lie, and they have continued to perpetuate the lie in many ways, even though they "know or should have known" that the stuff cannot work.
4) So they should stop doing it, and be penalized under the law for their lies and taking money from people under pretenses that they knew to be false.

Boy I have spent way too much time and energy on this subject today!
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
Boy I have spent way too much time and energy on this subject today!

[/ QUOTE ]LOL!!!
grin.gif
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
1) The product has been scientifically proven not to work. In fact, it CANNOT work.

[/ QUOTE ]

This probably depends on who's "scientist" you talk to. I'm guessing there will be floods of hunters who have had success with the garments that will say differently. It must not work, Lee and Tiffany, Kisky's or Drury's have certainly never killed any big bucks while wearing it!
wall.gif
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) The product has been scientifically proven not to work. In fact, it CANNOT work.

[/ QUOTE ]

This probably depends on who's "scientist" you talk to. I'm guessing there will be floods of hunters who have had success with the garments that will say differently. It must not work, Lee and Tiffany, Kisky's or Drury's have certainly never killed any big bucks while wearing it!
wall.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Better ad primos to your group also.
grin.gif
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
1) The product has been scientifically proven not to work. In fact, it CANNOT work.

[/ QUOTE ]


and you did the testing to verify this right??
you have documented results to prove this right??

Awesome
lets see them!!
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) The product has been scientifically proven not to work. In fact, it CANNOT work.

[/ QUOTE ]

This probably depends on who's "scientist" you talk to. I'm guessing there will be floods of hunters who have had success with the garments that will say differently. It must not work, Lee and Tiffany, Kisky's or Drury's have certainly never killed any big bucks while wearing it!
wall.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Not jumping you Skully, but I would hardly classify any of these hunters as scientists. Paid promoters would more closely resemble their dealings with the industry.

The amazing animals these hunters have harvested have mainly come primarily based on location. Not soley, but primarily. Like the Wensel boys are famous for saying, you can't kill whats not there.
grin.gif


The lawsuit is over the top IMO, but does draw some attention to the area and is fair criticism. If you have not read the filing I would encourage you to do so. Carbon science is readily available on the web.
grin.gif
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

I didn't mean to insinuate that the "Spokes-sheeple" hunters were scientists. I am guessing that Scent-lock will call a board of their own scientists to try to sway the jury. And yes, location is the main factor in killing big bucks. That's why its funny to me that people fall for these gimmicks in the first place. Your brand of bow or clothing is not going to wrap your hands around a booner. They used bad judgment in their purchases and to ease their embarrassment decided to sue. Save me oh four wise men from Minnesota.....protect me from the evil ones!
grin.gif
grin.gif
grin.gif
grin.gif
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

Alas, we are on the same page! I didn't read you post to well.
blush.gif
grin.gif
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
and you did the testing to verify this right??
you have documented results to prove this right??

Awesome
lets see them!!


[/ QUOTE ]

It is readily available to anyone who wants to find it. I already pointed you to one place but you obviously don't care enough to read it. Why would I bother to point you to another?

If you really do care about getting to the bottom of it rathe than sitting there taking potshots at those who have taken the time to learn about this, here's another good source from an outdoor writer who really did a lot of research:

http://www.trmichels.com/ActivatedCarbonScience.htm

I'll warn you. If you want to really learn about this stuff, you are going to have to make a committment because it is long and detailed. And you are going to realize that you look pretty darn silly right now to those who have taken the time to do the reaearch.
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
And you are going to realize that you look pretty darn silly right now to those who have taken the time to do the reaearch.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only ones who look silly are the ones who fell for the gimmick in the first place.
confused.gif
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

Boy now I feel like you are trying to get me in a pissing match:

[ QUOTE ]
The only ones who look silly are the ones who fell for the gimmick in the first place.


[/ QUOTE ]

I guess this means you knew it was a gimmick in the first place so that's why you didn't buy it.

Really.
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and you did the testing to verify this right??
you have documented results to prove this right??

Awesome
lets see them!!


[/ QUOTE ]

It is readily available to anyone who wants to find it. I already pointed you to one place but you obviously don't care enough to read it. Why would I bother to point you to another?

If you really do care about getting to the bottom of it rathe than sitting there taking potshots at those who have taken the time to learn about this, here's another good source from an outdoor writer who really did a lot of research:

http://www.trmichels.com/ActivatedCarbonScience.htm

I'll warn you. If you want to really learn about this stuff, you are going to have to make a committment because it is long and detailed. And you are going to realize that you look pretty darn silly right now to those who have taken the time to do the reaearch.

[/ QUOTE ]


Soooooo..... are you the one with the lawsuit against them?
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

[ QUOTE ]
Boy now I feel like you are trying to get me in a pissing match:

[ QUOTE ]
The only ones who look silly are the ones who fell for the gimmick in the first place.


[/ QUOTE ]

I guess this means you knew it was a gimmick in the first place so that's why you didn't buy it.

Really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets just say that I don't believe everything I see and hear on T.V. or in magazines. It's nothing personal, I'm just a bit peeved about sue happy people who weren't FORCED to buy anything.
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

Guys, lay off Iowa1. He is not stating anything that is not easily backed up with pages and pages of facts.

How these facts are applied may be up for debate and that is fine, but lets keep it civil. He has provided you plenty of links. I would read them and let the discussion go from there.

I personally, have bought the suits in the past and do feel somewhat foolish but it is OK to admit when you may have errored. Right? At least keep it civil here. Sarcasm is not the best conversation tool in a debate.

The claim is primarily based on false advertising...which is certainlly true when you read some of the Scent-Lok claims. I am not the law suit type of guy, but it is what it is here I guess. Iowa1 is bringing this to our attention. I thought it made for good discussion.
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

I bought a scent loc under suit several years ago. I drank the cool-aid because they said all you have to do is put it in your home dryer on high for 60 minutes. Then a year or maybe two later I hear that to reactivate carbon it has to be heated to 1500 (I think) deress. I belive it was Vman that posted that. I felt like I had been royaly screwed.

Here is the catch. I still wear it and "reactivate it" in my home dryer. Do I think the charchol is absorbing my scent? Noway. I think with the material so tightly woven and the cuffs and neck are so close fiting it prevents my skin dandruf from escaping into the air and therfore the wind. So in a scense, it is "scent blocking" but not the way it is advertized. I try to keep the clothes I wear over the liner as scent free as possible.

One note about scientific proof, do you take anything on blind faith or do you need proof of everything? Think about that for awhile before you answer.

The 'Bonker
 
Re: MN hunters sue Scentlok and Scentblocker

To me, what is really bad is how all of these celebs that are sponsored by Scentlok, shamelessly promote these products and actually claim that they would have never got a deer without the scentlok. These celebs have been educated by these forums and know the controversy regarding the facts on carbon reactivation in a homeowners dryer and still they choose to dupe the public; all for the almighty dollar.
confused.gif
Young kids are bought into this and older hunters that have not learned about the science of carbon due to these forums go out and spend their hard earned $$ on something that can't possibly work. Some kid delivering newspapers and blows off getting some good quality arrows or a bow so that he can have carbon clothing instead.This infomercial off Scentloks website with all of these celebs makes me a little ill. I quit watching the American Archer after an episode last year that was an entire show advertising the fact that if you don't wear Scentlok you are not a good hunter.
frown.gif
Of course these celeb hunters are going to promote what puts their mug on TV. That is why Lone Wolfs video(Todd) he put out last year(White Knuckle) was a breath of fresh air. NO BS like these other nimrods promote. I like Fred Eichler too as the guy is not a sellout with some junk designed to dupe the hunting public. SL has some deep pockets and these hunting celebs have sold out their fellow hunters all in the name of $$ IMO.

http://www.scentlok.com/science.asp

At the end of this video they have apparantly ended the "facts" info like they used to have on it.
grin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom