Shock boots vs no shock boots

[Tom]

Seen a lot of opinions about this on other forums. What's your opinion?

[RidgeRunner]

My .02 is that they do serve the purpose of minimizing the possibility that debris will get to the seal around the shaft but could also keep debris in once it gets in. So 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

Personally I don't really like the look of them so I don't run them.

[Patrolman]

Personally, I take the approach of trying to keep things clean and run the boots. Again, to each their own.

[Backcountryislife]

I feel if you make sure they're clean when installed, boots are a help... you'll just get more life from the shock with boots imo.

[Jim]

you'll just get more lift from the shock with boots imo

I am curious as to your reasoning behind this thought?

[Backcountryislife]

I am curious as to your reasoning behind this thought?

Well, I've replaced many seals on shocks over the years, and generally if you can keep debris away from them they live longer. From an aesthetic point of view I think boots/ dust guards look like poo, but they serve a purpose imo. Now... if you're running through mud that's thin enough to get into the small air holes (there are usually a few small holes at the bottom of the boot that keep it from ballooning when compressed) it's not likely to all get back out... and then I can definitely see the point in wanting them open... but you can always just cut the zip tie after something like that, hit them with water, zip tie them back on.


IMO, it's all about keeping those seals clean, if you get junk in there, they wear quickly, then we see leakage... and not long after, failure.


EDIT: HAHA... just noticed that I said LIFT, not LIFE... derp.:rolleyes: (it's almost as if those two words have different meanings, huh? I was only two keys away from what I wanted to say dangit!)

[Tom]

The reason I asked is because in some other forums they are strongly against them. The thought is that they hold water and debris thus causing corrosion and extra wear. There's a YouTube video showing water.

I bought a set for my new shocks going in when I do my lift. I'm thinking I'll open up the bottom holes a bit with a hot nail or something so that any water can drain.

[Backcountryislife]

The reason I asked is because in some other forums they are strongly against them. The thought is that they hold water and debris thus causing corrosion and extra wear. There's a YouTube video showing water.

I bought a set for my new shocks going in when I do my lift. I'm thinking I'll open up the bottom holes a bit with a hot nail or something so that any water can drain.

No matter how you cut it, it's a double edged sword. If you do a ton of water crossings with dirty water... then perhaps that makes sense, but in our dry climate, where the water tends to be clean when we cross it, I'm going to firmly stand on the side of the boot being relatively tight. If you lived in S carolina, where you're crossing bog type water, and hitting mud holes... totally makes sense, but here we deal with more dust & small sharp particulates, and here / there do crossings through pretty clean water. IMO giving the junk more room to get in is asking for more issues as "more" will get in, and though water will escape easier, particulates aren't as likely to.

Just my take. I've dealt with suspensions of many kinds over the years, from bikes to cars to trucks, and IMO it's hugely dependent on how you use it. In sleds... we never use them, in Bikes, we use a neoprene cover, as it stops the mud, and bikes rarely get fully immersed to cover the neoprene... and some leave it off, as most people wash a high end bike after each ride where it gets dirty. On a dirtbike... it's got a boot to protect the seals or at least has a guard, but the front forks are inverted in general, so particulates won't "sit" on the seals in that situation, so going to a guard makes sense, protect the stanchions, but let stuff fall off the seals. Our rear shock is like that, but not generally the fronts.