Dodge Ram, Billstein shocks.

[Fastass350]

Anybody put them on? I just got a pair for the rear and they don't come with boots. Rather than having the rods exposed, I want to cover them with boots but can't find what fits. The neck on the top of the boot needs to be rather small, and the boots I ordered aren't so they won't work. Anyone ran into this?

Thanks
Chris

[DRobnsn]

Strange, are they the 5100 series? All the sets of 5100's I've been involved with came with boots.

[baker5150]

All 4 of my 5100's came with boots   

[92xj]

Don't run boots. They trap moisture, grit and dirt inside them wearing the shock out. I've never run boots on any of my shocks from daily driver cheapos to high end off road buggy stuff.

[DRobnsn]

92xj beat me to it  I'll post it anyway.

Well after some internet searching and looking at Jeep forums you may want to do some research and think about whether or not you want to use boots. From the quick looking I just did allot of guys say don't use boots cause it just keeps moisture and buildup stuck between the boot, cylinder, and seal. They may be on to something, I've never had a problem with boots but the vehicles I've kept around long enough to have a problem don't typically get driven in the wet anyway. 

If you think about it every piece of logging or excavating equipment has no protection on the hydraulic cylinder rods and they get the snot beat out of them. Same goes with pneumatic cylinders. We have quite a few pneumatic cylinders with no boots where at work in a extremely dusty environment (concrete bagging facility) and have very few failures related to cylinder seals, that might be a different story if we were to trap the materials in with a boot 

Food for thought anyway, I'll be pondering about it myself as my pickup needs new shocks in the near future.

Let me know what you end up doing.       

[baker5150]

92xj beat me to it  I'll post it anyway.

Well after some internet searching and looking at Jeep forums you may want to do some research and think about whether or not you want to use boots. From the quick looking I just did allot of guys say don't use boots cause it just keeps moisture and buildup stuck between the boot, cylinder, and seal. They may be on to something, I've never had a problem with boots but the vehicles I've kept around long enough to have a problem don't typically get driven in the wet anyway. 

If you think about it every piece of logging or excavating equipment has no protection on the hydraulic cylinder rods and they get the snot beat out of them. Same goes with pneumatic cylinders. We have quite a few pneumatic cylinders with no boots where at work in a extremely dusty environment (concrete bagging facility) and have very few failures related to cylinder seals, that might be a different story if we were to trap the materials in with a boot 

Food for thought anyway, I'll be pondering about it myself as my pickup needs new shocks in the near future.

Let me know what you end up doing.       

These are great points, but why would Bilstein provide the boots then?  They even show the boots in their adds. 
Some of their shocks come with steel covers over the shafts too.

How would moisture/dirt effect the seal in a boot vs out of a boot?  Wouldn't a boot keep the majority of dirt and moisture out?  I could see some condensation.
Without a boot the shaft would see a lot more abuse from moisture and dirt then with a boot, right? 

You guys really got me thinking about pulling the boots off.   

[Fastass350]

92xj beat me to it  I'll post it anyway.
If you think about it every piece of logging or excavating equipment has no protection on the hydraulic cylinder rods and they get the snot beat out of them. Same goes with pneumatic cylinders. We have quite a few pneumatic cylinders with no boots where at work in a extremely dusty environment (concrete bagging facility) and have very few failures related to cylinder seals, that might be a different story if we were to trap the materials in with a boot  :

I pondered that same thing, so maybe you are on to something. My only concern is the rear shocks are mounted with the rod down, exposing them to the potential of being sandblasted over time. Maybe I'll just do the no boot thing and see how the rods hold up over time.

They are the 5100 series, and so far I love them. But my last ones were shot probably 20k ago. 

[Fastass350]

I can attest to boots holding moisture. For the past couple years on this truck I have fought driveline carrier bearing issues. I thought it was a problem that was always going to be there because of its lift. Come to find out the slip joint between the two halves burns through grease like I do with my favorite whiskey. Of course they don't include a zerk fitting for grease, so I did. I cut the boot off and it was nasty in there. Rusty and full of water. Added the fitting and now it's greased regular. Time will tell but so far so good. Boots do hold water and junk but they also protect.

[huntnnw]

I never run boots! I remember pulling some ranchos off a truck that were full of mud for years ruined the shock

[follow maggie]

When you don't install the boots, the mud, water and crap just falls off. I've gotten much longer life from shocks without boots than with them on.

[Alchase]

For daily drivers the boots are just fine.
I have never heard of a shock failing (on a daily driver) because of stuff trapped in the boots. Even on mud rigs, failure with boots is rare but does happen.
I used boots on all my Ranchos, though ensuring they got cleaned out after particularly deep mud runs was par for the course, like repacking bearings.
If I was building a trail only rig, the boot would not be there.
Believe it or not, there is a reason for the boots, under normal wear and tear they do a great job of keeping the vast majority of debris out.

[Pinetar]

They came stock on my Dodge Power Wagon, no boots, 70,000 miles and holding up great!