OP
Wiznutaggie
Contributor
I've had those same thoughts, but I just might be bored enough to pack it and see what it does for kicks and giggles! The thicker walls of the boot obscures about half of the ambient chamber holes, but there is still access to the thinner expansion portion of the boot.Without dampening your enthusiasm, let me offer a caution regarding using the Mk10 boot for a Mk20.
If you look at your photo, you'll see how stretched the boot is compared with the much narrower diameter that it's designed for.
The boot works because the cylindrical pocket between the two "walls" is a flexible chamber as the piston moves. With valve opening and closure during breathing (and to a much larger degree upon reg pressurization) the piston head moves up and down. Therefore the volume of the ambient chamber changes by a measurable amount. The existing boot works because the "roof" of the chamber is very thin and flexes in and out accommodating volume changes inside the ambient chamber. When the piston head moves up, the lube oozes out of the holes, but is contained in the boot. When the piston head moves down, that lube goes back in the holes, and the roof becomes concave.
When the boot is stretched as much as it has to be by the Mk20, that chamber is significantly diminished in volume. If there's not enough volume to allow uninhibited lube movement in and out of the holes, IP will fluctuate mid-breath.
My second observation is that in the Mk20 pictured, you'll note that the ambient holes are very close to the bottom of that groove. Therefore, the boot's "walls" will necessarily partially occlude the ambient holes, and further constrict lube movement.
I don't think that model Mk20 will work as well with a boot, because there needs to be room for the boot walls to seal on either side of the ambient holes.
Sorry to be the bearer of potentially bad news.