Researchers typically evaluate and compare protocols on the testbeds by running them one at a time. This methodology ignores the variation in link qualities and wireless environment across these experiments. These variations can introduce significant noise in the results. Evaluating two protocols concurrently, however, suffers from inter-protocol interactions. These interactions can perturb performance even under very light load, especially timing and timing sensitive protocols. We argue that the benefits of running protocols concurrently greatly outweigh the disadvantages. Protocols rarely run in isolation in real networks, and so considering such interactions is valuable. Although the wireless environment is still uncontrolled, concurrent evaluations make comparisons fair and more statistically sound. Through experiments on two testbeds, we make the case for evaluating and comparing low data-rate sensor network protocols by running them concurrently.