mx5cartalk.com

I'm curious as to if anybody can tell me if not running any Dust boots actually disqualifies your car from getting a RWC, after a bit of research most aftermarket brands apparently recommend not to use them as they trap dirt and water? Either way, the actual RWC requirements handbook simply says "All joints, bushes, pivots and dust and grease seals must be in good condition" and i definitely don't want to pay a mechanic $720 to replace them. Can i just take them off? Or alternatively is a type of boot/seal i can put on without taking the suspension off? It seems excessive to take apart every corner of the cars suspension to put dust boots on.

I'd imagine they would all have to be in good condition.

You can't just remove then as they hold the grease required for the joints.

Easiest way is to replace them all

Regie wrote:You can't just remove then as they hold the grease required for the joints.

Not the shock ones.

Shock ones just keep dust off the shock shaft.
Yeah, it's better to have them, but it's not the end of the world if you don't.


As for RWC though, that's another story.

I would first of all suggest getting in with a razor blade and cutting off the ragged remains of the dust boots (if they're stuffed, if they're ok then leave it be)
Don't cut too high, the NA for some reason has the dust boots moulded as part of the bump stop. The dust boot part is only 1mm thick, once it gets thicker, that's bumpstop.

I'd then suggest calling a couple of RWC testers and asking.
Then get it inspected, as long as you cut off the remains of the boot neatly it should look like it never had them.


RWC testers aren't as bad as people make out, my partner and I had no issues getting a 35 year old car passed with not a single issue except for some leaky gaskets.

vv4rhead wrote:after a bit of research most aftermarket brands apparently recommend not to use them as they trap dirt and water?

i dont see how that is possible since they are neither water or air tight.

Well i would imagine as a factor of them not being water or airtight, water and dirt get inside them and then find it difficult to get out, whereas if they were sealed from the atmosphere it wouldn't be able to?

It puzzles me why dust boots on dampers would be a safety issue Some manufacturers use them and some do not.
The name is misleading for a start. They are air bellows which suck and blow dust and air in and out with each stroke of the damper.
They don't eliminate dust, just reduce the quantity which can settle and accumulate around the top seal of the damper. Accumulated debris around the seal can reduce its life. They eliminate splattering of the rods by flying particles.

Dust boots make it impossible to make a visual examination of the seal area for signs of accumulation or failure of the damper itself ie weeping of the seal. Such dampers should be replaced to the manufacturer's fixed schedule.
However pre-failure maintenance of any damper maintained to point of failure (our legal obligation) is less effective using visual inspection. (a potential safety issue in itself)

It is the seal which is the safety critical item not the dust boot. Failure of the seal has a safety consequence, failure of the dust boot has none (in fact it fails from new as it has designer apertures to let dust in.)
Splits or cracks simply increase the size of the apertures making the safety inspection itself more effective.

By rights the boots should be cut off for the inspection and then a decision made as to whether to replace them or not depending on the environment in which the car is used.
They may be an effective cover for chrome rods where splatter from salt or gravel covered roads is a well known damaging occurrence for example.
Safety is assured either by predetermined fixed damper changeout intervals or by testing and inspection to point of failure aided in part by pre-failure inspection of external damper seals.

Possibly boot life is a crude changeout indicator for the dampers provided by the manufacturers? Therefore changeout of dust boots is probably only a consideration if the owner follows a manufacturer's recommendations for fixed period changeout.
The legal requirement however is repair or changeout of dampers before point of failure not necessarily fixed period. (Imagine the red tape involved in enforcing fixed period maintenance !)

The process is fix the things that are obviously not roadworthy and leave the debatable ones alone. Then you choose a rwc checker and find out their process . Some will do a quick check without charge and some will give advice on an item of doubt- such as dust boots- or take a punt and don't ask just see what transpires. An rwc is for safety items and testers are not going out on a limb for customers they may never see again.