clarke tanks



14 replies to this topic
  • iron_savior

Posted February 11, 2004 - 01:58 PM

#1

hi,

just recieved my clarke 4.3 tank, i must say i'm impressed
with the finishing.

just one thing i wanted to know - how does the petrol get from one side of the tank to the fuelcock, seems like there
going to be a lot of unused petrol sitting somewhere in the tank,

so i suppose the best way to get the fuel across is to tilt the bike right over.

cheers
w

  • BuddyK

Posted February 11, 2004 - 02:08 PM

#2

Yes, pretty large reserve feature. I assume that's why I've read were some remove the reserve tube from the petcock, because there is a built in reserve in the tank?
I have a Clarke 4.3 on mine & am very happy with it.

  • qadsan

Posted February 11, 2004 - 02:35 PM

#3

seems like there
going to be a lot of unused petrol sitting somewhere in the tank,



Yes, that's always bugged me too, but its the same situation with the larger IMS tank. I thought about installing a fuel pump or installing a petcock on the other side to make better use of that fuel, but the tank gave me the range I needed as is so I left things alone. It's not perfect, but I liked my Clarke better than my IMS tanks in terms of fit, finish & quality, although the IMS 3.2 is my frequent choice for most of my riding because I like the outer dimensions better.

  • Rokatt88

Posted February 11, 2004 - 02:53 PM

#4

Yes, pretty large reserve feature. I assume that's why I've read were some remove the reserve tube from the petcock, because there is a built in reserve in the tank?



Hmmm...that's a good idea. I had to post to show off my shiny new avatar! :)

Hmmm....that's

  • Dual_Dog

Posted February 11, 2004 - 04:27 PM

#5

I agree. The fit & finish of the Clarke tanks are as good as it gets for aftermarket. I've got the 4.0 for my XRL and the range seems like its almost double what it was with the puny 2.8 stock thimble. :)

But you've basically got a double reserve. Since the tank lobes are so deep, all the fuel can't get across to the petcock side. So, find a soft patch somewhere and lean it over. The only trick is picking it back up! :D

  • Dutch

Posted February 11, 2004 - 04:46 PM

#6

The stock tank has the same reserve feature.

  • irondude

Posted February 11, 2004 - 05:08 PM

#7

Thats driven me nuts. I've had to lean the bike over 4-5 times to get the last 1/4 gallon over-and then some will still splash over to the left side anyway--never being used. The 7 gallon IMS tank has a cool fuel pump-maybe the 4.6 IMS and 4.3 Clark need it as well...the 6 gallon Acerbis has dual petcocks and it works well.
Mikuni offers decent fuel pumps as well-standard issue on the Dakar bikes...

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • JackAttack

Posted February 11, 2004 - 08:37 PM

#8

Throw the bike into a wheelie and drift it to the right..........all the fuel moves over. :)

Irondude,
I would like to hook up with you befor the San Felipe 250, please PM me with your plans for Friday before the race. :D

  • huntmaster

Posted February 12, 2004 - 04:26 AM

#9

I noticed the same with the 3.6 gallon unit I bought for my old CR500 back before my 650. Great, OEM-like quality, fit and finish. There are more expensive tanks out there that don't even come close!

  • somekevinguy

Posted February 12, 2004 - 08:20 PM

#10

you could just install two L shaped fittings, one on each side and run a piece of fuel line in between them.

  • ydeeps13

Posted February 13, 2004 - 08:17 AM

#11

What kind of range (miles) to you get from the Clarke 4.3 tank? I want to get a tank for my XR600 and am trying to decide on capacity.
please help. :) <font color="orange">

  • qadsan

Posted February 13, 2004 - 09:05 AM

#12

I used to safely get 100+ miles of normal desert trail riding with the Clarke 4.3 and that's being conservative.

  • ydeeps13

Posted February 13, 2004 - 09:18 AM

#13

I can now get 80 miles from my stock 2.5 gal tank. So I should be able to almost double that dont you think. :)

  • iron_savior

Posted February 13, 2004 - 09:32 AM

#14

well, in theory i've calculated using my average fuel consumption , i should be able to get a 120 miles,
(204 km's) thats using every bit of fuel in the tank.

i think that would tie in with quadsan saying he can get
safely 100 + miles

cheers
w

  • qadsan

Posted February 13, 2004 - 10:34 AM

#15

Thanks iron_savior for clearing that up for me :)

ydeeps13, my MPG really depended on the type of riding, how hard I was riding, my gearing, etc. My MPG varied quite a bit dependong on these factors. There were times I couldn't even get 50 miles from the stock tank and other times I'd get ~80. If I was riding hard MX type stuff where I was constantly getting off the throttle, then back to WOT, off the throttle, then back to WOT, etc, then I'd be lucky to get 20 MPG at best. I wouldn't do much better on slow trails when I'd ride them hard and playing hard in the dunes were another killer on MPG for me. I typically get ~25 MPG riding many slower trails and closer to ~30 to ~35 MPG when things speed up a good bit on other trails. In the wide open, I can get closer to ~40 MPG while taking it easy on the throttle, but it's been a while since I've checked this all out and my memory might be a bit fuzzy on these figures. The bottom line was that my MPG varied a lot depending on my speed and how much I was twsiting my wrist. The 100+ miles of range from my Clarke 4.3 was a conservative figure that I could always count on as a minimum, but I could usually go significantly father, especially if I was easy on the throttle and riding at higher speeds.





Related Content

 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.