TW200 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So, I've been looking at tackling some longer/more remote desert trips in the near future, and as wise forum members have pointed out before I could probably make use of some greater fuel capacity if I'm gonna be heading out that far.



I already have the rear Cycleracks rack, so the cheapest option is a 1 gal gas can bungeed down. Not super secure, but cheap. I like cheap.

MSRP: about $5.00 OR $5.00/gal(capacity)

Pros: Cheaper than dirt

Cons: May or may not still be there when you run out of gas in your bolted-down tank



I've also looked at the Clarke 2.7 gal aftermarket tank. Seems to be a fairly simple install, and the natural translucent color provides both a classic enduro look and a handy fuel gauge.

MSRP: $218.00 from Clarke, $199 from Procycle (Thnx mrbracket!) Still, an astronomical $220.00/gal (capacity)

Pros: Just fill up and go

Cons: Your wife wants to know why you're taking up space in the garage storing your old metal TW tank, also kinda crazy expensive for 60-80 extra miles of range (YMMV)



Paradoxically, the most expensive option I've come up with seems to be the most appealing as well. I should be working for Apple.

Cycleracks Front Rack: MSRP $154.00

Cycleracks Bag Supports: MSRP $69.00

Kolpin Fuel Pack Jr. W/Pack mount: MSRP $57.49 (L side)

Kolpin Fuel Pack Jr. W/Pack mount: MSRP $57.49 (R Side)



Total MSRP: $337.98 OR $112.66/gal(capacity)

Pros: Your bike will look like an expedition-ready fuel-toting monster, and you get more than 3 times the extra fuel capacity offered by a TW-specific Clarke tank

Cons: You're really gonna miss that $340



Still, remember that the expensive set up with the front rack and fuel panniers DOES offer more than triple the extra fuel carrying capacity of a TW Clarke tank, and that setup offers additional load-handling options as well. There are also fringe benefits relating to load balance when using the rear rack for luggage, etc.



Hm, I have a lot to think about.



What do you guys use for extra fuel, and if you can... break the upgrade down to dollars and cents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,516 Posts
I do not have a need as of yet to carry extra fuel.I like your more expensive option,it's has more, option potential!.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,369 Posts
Steel OEM XT350 tank, 3.2 gals. Donor bike purchased for $150, parted out for $500+, net cost + $350 (YMMV), plus the innumerable other XT350 parts swapped onto TW. 1.5 gals over stock TW



Pros: Bulletproof, removes as easily as the stock tank for service, good to the last drop, uses same locking gas cap as TW, all fuel weight carried where it should be, no rack space consumed.



Cons: Minor seat mods or "bendy seat" and relocating rear mount. 30 mins., zero dollars.







Clarke XT350 4.0 gal., same cost as Clarke 2.7 gal. TW tank.



Pros: Same as steel XT350 tank but 2.2 extra gals. over stock TW. Weighs less, won't rust.



Cons: Arguably less bulletproof than steel. "Bendy-seat" option likely to cause wear against plastic tank, more committed seat mods.







Clarke 4.1 gal. XT225 tank. Same cost as



Pros: Won't rust. Looks cool



Cons: Not "good to the last drop". Innaccessible fuel in "ears" of tank when mounted on a TW. Less useable fuel than 4.0 XT350 tank.







Clarke 2.7 gal. TW replacement tank. .9 gals. over stock TW.



Pros: Nearly a bolt-on, no seat mods, won't rust, lighter than stock tank.



Cons: PITA to remove for service, won't clear certain bar and riser combos, side cover mods usually required.







Kolpins, gas cans, number plate tanks, et al.



Pros: Cheap. Easily removed when not needed.



Cons: Take up valuable real estate, generally adds weight in all the wrong places, vulnerable to loss or theft.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Now that's what I call a reply!



But seriously, you can't legitimately suggest that the average forum member will be able to purchase and scavenge an XT350 and make a profit!



Kudos to you, but c'mon! That's a rare deal.



$120.40/gal(extra capacity) is the going rate for a Clarke XT350 4.0 tank, and by the numbers that's a worse deal than the auxiliary Kolpin tanks.



Besides, lets consider preserving those classic TW lines for posterity.



I've noticed that your icon features a stock TW tank as does mine, why mess with perfection?



Just for the sake of argument!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I like those Rotopax containers, but I'm allergic to their price tags!



Nice mount though, can we look forward to a similar bracket on Procycle soon?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
631 Posts
I like those Rotopax containers, but I'm allergic to their price tags!



Nice mount though, can we look forward to a similar bracket on Procycle soon?


No, too much work making the rack.. I'd have to charge too much to make them... I really like it tho!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,427 Posts
Can anyone address the DOT legality issues regarding these options? I've read that to be street legal or in DOT compliance, that you must have a steel main tank. In Washington state, you must be street legal to ride on forest service roads. I can't imagine anywhere that I might ride where at least some of my time on any given adventure wouldn't include some forest service roads or pavement. This has me hesitant to try any of the Clarke options and would make me want to go with a steel XT main tank to increase range. I am curious about how affixing plastic auxiliary cans meet the legalities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,621 Posts
I've been stopped several times by rangers on National forest land without any problem. My solid color clarke tank does not throw up the red flags that a translucent one would. They have also ignored my kolpin fuel pack bolted to the side of my bike. I worry more about getting caught riding without a Nat forest MVUM. As long as you don't provoke a leo somehow by doing something stupid they are generally very nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,369 Posts
Now that's what I call a reply!



But seriously, you can't legitimately suggest that the average forum member will be able to purchase and scavenge an XT350 and make a profit!



Kudos to you, but c'mon! That's a rare deal.



$120.40/gal(extra capacity) is the going rate for a Clarke XT350 4.0 tank, and by the numbers that's a worse deal than the auxiliary Kolpin tanks.



Besides, lets consider preserving those classic TW lines for posterity.



I've noticed that your icon features a stock TW tank as does mine, why mess with perfection?



Just for the sake of argument!


For the record that pic was taken the day I first assembled my bike. I ditched the stock tank less than a month after the initial build.. Barely suitable for watering a potted begonia.



Full apologies in advance to those using gas cans, fuel paks or those who find the stocker perfectly adequate and have their own reasons for doing so. Just playing devil's advocate biased in favor of the big tank option FIRST as best bang for the buck. You axed for cost-to-benefit and IMO the added capacity shouldn't be your sole consideration, but if it is you've already nailed the 5 dollar bouncing plastic gas can as the best bang for the buck. I think you're mistaken in placing fuel paks, side racks and all their associated bracketry as next in line.



Ideally (again, IMO) fuel belongs between your legs. Any of the plastic tanks weigh roughly half what the stocker weighs, even those with twice the capacity. Aside from the weight of the fuel itself they add no additional weight to the bike, and are equally slim as the stocker in the areas which matter. No law says you have to fill them to the brim at all times, you don't have to stop to fill them, they don't take up cargo space and ultimately the weight is carried lower on the bike than with most rack mounted options. I'm just saying that there's no PRACTICAL downside to any of the typical big tank options as opposed to those of cans or fuel paks.



If bang for the buck includes a preferred aesthetic, yer on yer own. Given my own criteria aside from scoring a sweet deal on a steel XT tank the Clarke 4 gallon XT350 tank is the best bang for the buck, the 2.7 barely acceptable but at least it's a gallon you don't have to find a home for elsewhere on the bike, ever. The XT225 tank isn't really in the running due to the innaccessible fuel thing, but if you're big on that particular aesthetic it splits the difference between the steel XT tank and its 4 gallon Clarke counterpart, so that might bump it to #1. Gas cans and fuel paks have their place but only after I hit the 200 mile mark.



Your front Cyclerack, side racks and two Kolpins easily add up to twice as much weight (and in all the wrong places) and way more munny than a big tank, and a tank won't block yer headlight or land you on your noggin in the rough stuff. 1.8 x 3= 5.4 gals. 4 + 1= 5 gals. Throw a gallon on the rear rack and you're nearly tripling stock capacity without them. Go find a superlight over-the-headlight front rack if you think you'll need more capacity. Because my fuel is in the tank I get all the gear, clothing and tools for two (for two weeks) on my rear rack. The only overflow item is occasionally the second sleeping bag. Other than that a front rack is a nuisance. I've built two, neither is on my bike and for good reason. Trust me, the biggest rack you want up there would be something similar to R80t's latest, and the most weight you'd ever want up there is 3-5 lbs., tops.



Load balancing is a non-issue unless you plan to haul out a quartered elk. Or hang a two gallon Rotopax off your rear rack 2 feet beyond the rear axle of a loaded TW.
Or worse, over the front axle.



A four gallon tank is exactly $54.50 per gallon by your MSRP. Your stocker will likely fetch a minimum of $100 on the used market if it's in good shape. By my math that brings your total to about $29.50 per gallon. Bounce that against yer Kolpins and you're about even munny.



It's unfortunate that Acerbis no longer makes the 5 gallon XT600 tank. Believe it or not it's actually as unobtrusive as the stocker and has a good-to-the-last-drop petcock at the lowest point on BOTH sides. Acerbis knows how to build a tank. Clarke just fills the space. But I digress. As usual.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts




I added two liters by mounting these fuel bottles. I know that is not a lot of fuel, but, right now, my trips are within mt stock tanks' range. I carry the extra fuel because sometimes I do run close.



I am concerned that there is the possibility of a fiery crash if we slide down the road with the fuel cell on the down side. Yea, I guess I'm somewhat of a gambler, "cause the left side bottle is still there.



I know you can't put a price on safety, but risk is often rated by the manager of the budget.



What are your thoughts on this "Fiery Crash" thing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,431 Posts
I use a stock 2.3 gallon tank from a XT225, purchased for $200 and a .5 gallon auxilliary fuel can from my old Honda CT90, but I only carry it on rare occasions. Combined they give me a range of 220 miles. With the stock XT225 tank, all the gas is accessible. lizrdbrth is right, fuel should be in the tank, go as big as you can. I went as big as I needed to go, but I'd love another gallon!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
For the record that pic was taken the day I first assembled my bike. I ditched the stock tank less than a month after the initial build.. Barely suitable for watering a potted begonia.



Full apologies in advance to those using gas cans, fuel paks or those who find the stocker perfectly adequate and have their own reasons for doing so. Just playing devil's advocate biased in favor of the big tank option FIRST as best bang for the buck. You axed for cost-to-benefit and IMO the added capacity shouldn't be your sole consideration, but if it is you've already nailed the 5 dollar bouncing plastic gas can as the best bang for the buck. I think you're mistaken in placing fuel paks, side racks and all their associated bracketry as next in line.



Ideally (again, IMO) fuel belongs between your legs. Any of the plastic tanks weigh roughly half what the stocker weighs, even those with twice the capacity. Aside from the weight of the fuel itself they add no additional weight to the bike, and are equally slim as the stocker in the areas which matter. No law says you have to fill them to the brim at all times, you don't have to stop to fill them, they don't take up cargo space and ultimately the weight is carried lower on the bike than with most rack mounted options. I'm just saying that there's no PRACTICAL downside to any of the typical big tank options as opposed to those of cans or fuel paks.



If bang for the buck includes a preferred aesthetic, yer on yer own. Given my own criteria aside from scoring a sweet deal on a steel XT tank the Clarke 4 gallon XT350 tank is the best bang for the buck, the 2.7 barely acceptable but at least it's a gallon you don't have to find a home for elsewhere on the bike, ever. The XT225 tank isn't really in the running due to the innaccessible fuel thing, but if you're big on that particular aesthetic it splits the difference between the steel XT tank and its 4 gallon Clarke counterpart, so that might bump it to #1. Gas cans and fuel paks have their place but only after I hit the 200 mile mark.



Your front Cyclerack, side racks and two Kolpins easily add up to twice as much weight (and in all the wrong places) and way more munny than a big tank, and a tank won't block yer headlight or land you on your noggin in the rough stuff. 1.8 x 3= 5.4 gals. 4 + 1= 5 gals. Throw a gallon on the rear rack and you're nearly tripling stock capacity without them. Go find a superlight over-the-headlight front rack if you think you'll need more capacity. Because my fuel is in the tank I get all the gear, clothing and tools for two (for two weeks) on my rear rack. The only overflow item is occasionally the second sleeping bag. Other than that a front rack is a nuisance. I've built two, neither is on my bike and for good reason. Trust me, the biggest rack you want up there would be something similar to R80t's latest, and the most weight you'd ever want up there is 3-5 lbs., tops.



Load balancing is a non-issue unless you plan to haul out a quartered elk. Or hang a two gallon Rotopax off your rear rack 2 feet beyond the rear axle of a loaded TW.
Or worse, over the front axle.



A four gallon tank is exactly $54.50 per gallon by your MSRP. Your stocker will likely fetch a minimum of $100 on the used market if it's in good shape. By my math that brings your total to about $29.50 per gallon. Bounce that against yer Kolpins and you're about even munny.



It's unfortunate that Acerbis no longer makes the 5 gallon XT600 tank. Believe it or not it's actually as unobtrusive as the stocker and has a good-to-the-last-drop petcock at the lowest point on BOTH sides. Acerbis knows how to build a tank. Clarke just fills the space. But I digress. As usual.


OK, since you're determined to use your real-world experience to counter my fuzzy math I'll concede.



That front rack loaded down with gas cans looks pretty cool and expedition-y to me, but there's no doubt that weight carried there falls outside of the "magic triangle" of safe MC weight distribution.



I guess there's a reason they put the gas tank where they do after all!



So now I guess I'll start combing the craigslists for a donor XT350!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,369 Posts
I don't think your math is fuzzy. The only "real world experience" I may have over anyone else is the result of my "gram weenie" days back when I used to obsess over every ounce.



When you live by your scales you kinda get a feel for real economy of function.



I'm in recovery now. My TW is a total pig by my standards. The only thing that keeps it in check is the occasional timely relapse.



I also drink way too much coffee.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,431 Posts
If you are a member of the ADV board, post in the want ads on that site, I put in an ad for a XT225 tank and got two the next day. Ya never know, there may be a few XT350 tanks out there.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top