Which Tank


13 replies to this topic
  • arcboy

Posted March 27, 2008 - 12:50 PM

#1

I tried to research this but I didn't find quite what I was looking for.

My 01 WR426 has a crack at the top of the tank and I need a new one. I have figured out that I don't want a Clarke because I have to buy a YZ seat. So it is either IMS or Accerbis.

Which fits better?

What size should I get a 3.4 or 4.0 gallon. I don't do a lot of long distance riding other than on the road with the SM setup. The 4.0 would be nice but I don't want this huge tank looking like some ugly piece of plastic taking over my bike.

I priced out the 4.0 IMS for $250.00, not sure on Accerbis.

  • pcmech2

Posted March 27, 2008 - 01:46 PM

#2

http://cgi.ebay.com/...tem180225874826

or the 3.1 gal

http://cgi.ebay.com/...tem190208984870

  • arcboy

Posted March 27, 2008 - 02:01 PM

#3

Well doesnt quite answer my question.

  • pcmech2

Posted March 27, 2008 - 02:07 PM

#4

sorry, it was a cheap fix to your cracked tank....

  • Birdy426

Posted March 27, 2008 - 11:14 PM

#5

Any of the "YZ" tanks, Clarke, IMS, or Acerbis will require the YZ seat...which really improves the ergos. You can really slide up on the tank in turns to plant the front end. The Zip Ty tank carries the fuel lowest, followed by the Acerbis, then IMS and Clarke are about the same.

From what I can see from their web sites, the only tank that uses the stock WR seat is the IMS 4.0 gal. tank. The Acerbis refers you to a 3.4 gal YZF tank, as do the IMS and Clarke sites.

If you decide to go with the 3.4 gal tank and YZF seat (the WR and YZF shrouds are the same), the Acerbis has by far the best fit and finish. They also make the Zip Ty tank, which looks the trickest (and has the same high quality fit and finish) but blocks access to the chole and hot start buttons on the carb.

  • arcboy

Posted March 28, 2008 - 12:56 PM

#6

Any of the "YZ" tanks, Clarke, IMS, or Acerbis will require the YZ seat...which really improves the ergos. You can really slide up on the tank in turns to plant the front end. The Zip Ty tank carries the fuel lowest, followed by the Acerbis, then IMS and Clarke are about the same.

From what I can see from their web sites, the only tank that uses the stock WR seat is the IMS 4.0 gal. tank. The Acerbis refers you to a 3.4 gal YZF tank, as do the IMS and Clarke sites.

If you decide to go with the 3.4 gal tank and YZF seat (the WR and YZF shrouds are the same), the Acerbis has by far the best fit and finish. They also make the Zip Ty tank, which looks the trickest (and has the same high quality fit and finish) but blocks access to the chole and hot start buttons on the carb.


looks like the Zip Ty tank still requires a YZ seat according to their website, but doesn't look like it covers the choke and hot start buttons. I wonder if the 4.0 IMS tank looks ridiculously large on the bike.

If I can find a YZ seat for cheap than I will be getting the 4.0 IMS tank even though I won't need all 4 gallons.

  • Birdy426

Posted March 28, 2008 - 08:29 PM

#7

looks like the Zip Ty tank still requires a YZ seat according to their website, but doesn't look like it covers the choke and hot start buttons. I wonder if the 4.0 IMS tank looks ridiculously large on the bike.

If I can find a YZ seat for cheap than I will be getting the 4.0 IMS tank even though I won't need all 4 gallons.


Yup, Zip Ty does require the YZ seat. While the pic looks like you can get to the choke and hot start, I have read many reviews that say you can't...when Ty Davis was asked about it, he said "I don't need the choke when I race, and I have a remote hot start, so what's the big deal. I'd rather have the gas lower!"

For what it's worth, I picked up YZ seats in real good condition for both my son's 250 and my 426 on e-bay for about 25 bucks each.

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • motoxer667

Posted March 30, 2008 - 09:26 AM

#8

I tried to research this but I didn't find quite what I was looking for.

My 01 WR426 has a crack at the top of the tank and I need a new one. I have figured out that I don't want a Clarke because I have to buy a YZ seat. So it is either IMS or Accerbis.

Which fits better?

What size should I get a 3.4 or 4.0 gallon. I don't do a lot of long distance riding other than on the road with the SM setup. The 4.0 would be nice but I don't want this huge tank looking like some ugly piece of plastic taking over my bike.

I priced out the 4.0 IMS for $250.00, not sure on Accerbis.


I have a Zip Ty Racing 3.1 gal (made by IMS) tank on my YZ and you need a remote Hot Start. I can access the choke but it is hidden. You will notice how much narrower the bike is the the Zip Ty Racing tank is compared to your WR tank as the Zip Ty Tank is the same width as a stock YZ tank. You may also have to install YZ radiator shrouds.

Also, I ran into a problem trying to buy a exhaust as the tank would only work the the stock header bend.:prof:

Posted Image

  • arcboy

Posted March 30, 2008 - 12:56 PM

#9

I have a Zip Ty Racing 3.1 gal (made by IMS) tank on my YZ and you need a remote Hot Start. I can access the choke but it is hidden. You will notice how much narrower the bike is the the Zip Ty Racing tank is compared to your WR tank as the Zip Ty Tank is the same width as a stock YZ tank. You may also have to install YZ radiator shrouds.

Also, I ran into a problem trying to buy a exhaust as the tank would only work the the stock header bend.:prof:

Posted Image


Yeah that would be nice to have a low sitting tank but I think it just looks too big and I don't want to have to relocate the hot start. I guess the Acerbis 3.4 with the YZ seat is the one for me.

Thanks everyone for the help!

  • arcboy

Posted March 30, 2008 - 05:02 PM

#10

well actually I just checked out my manual and it says:

12 L (2.64 Imp gal, 3.17 US gal)
(For USA, CDN)
8.0 L (1.76 Imp gal, 2.11 US gal)
(Except for USA, CDN)
Reserve 1.6 L (0.35 Imp gal, 0.42 US gal)
(For USA, CDN)
1.4 L (0.31 Imp gal, 0.37 US gal)
(Except for USA, CDN)2

So I guess I will just get the stock replacement because I don't think that an extra .23 gallons is such a big deal and I think it should look better.

Unless I am reading it wrong.

  • Birdy426

Posted March 30, 2008 - 06:12 PM

#11

When my stock WR tank cracked (as they all seem to, eventually), I found it was cheaper by about 150 bucks to get the IMS YZ tank and a YZ seat that to order a stock tank from Yamaha. The YZ tank/seat combo is a whole lot thinner than the WR tank, and at least in my opinion, looks a whole lot better, too.

  • arcboy

Posted March 30, 2008 - 06:38 PM

#12

When my stock WR tank cracked (as they all seem to, eventually), I found it was cheaper by about 150 bucks to get the IMS YZ tank and a YZ seat that to order a stock tank from Yamaha. The YZ tank/seat combo is a whole lot thinner than the WR tank, and at least in my opinion, looks a whole lot better, too.


Yeah but you lose a a bunch of fuel capacity, that is one advantage of getting a WR.

  • Birdy426

Posted March 30, 2008 - 06:51 PM

#13

Yeah but you lose a a bunch of fuel capacity, that is one advantage of getting a WR.


To clarify...I went with the IMS 3.4 gal "YZF" tank and YZ seat...that way I didn't lose the capacity. I still think it looks better than the stock WR...the R/H side of the stock WR tank just looks funny to me. If I had it to do over again, I would go with the Acerbis 3.4 gal tank. Fit and finish are better, and it carries the fuel a bit lower

  • idahoaggie99

Posted March 31, 2008 - 07:54 AM

#14

I would recommend the Acerbis. It's well worth the change in handling. It really makes the bike better. If you still want the stocker. I have it sitting in the garage. Send me a message and I'll sell it to you.




 
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.