Would they work with bags???

 

I think I might have come up with an idea and a way to manufacture additional fuel cell space for our V-Rods.

There is space behind the rear shock absorber on each side to manufacture from aluminum fuel cells that could add about another 70 to 100 miles range.

These would be like something that would like like a bubble skirt off a car made in the 50's. Flat in design from top to bottom, but curvatured enough to follow the rear fender lines, and flat or straight to foolowe the shock lines. The rearmost would be a straight run up from the bottom to meet the rear most top curvature of the cell.

If the components were made from aluminum, they could be finished in satin or polished aluminum for looks, but, the thing is, the design could incorporate saddle bags that could be tied in over the side of the cell themselves.

The cells would be about 3 " deep, 15" in a slight curvature design at the top, and cut at the bottom to allow clearance of the caliper on the right, and belt on the left. The bottom of the cell would be anywhere from 7" to 9" in length, just above the rear axle, and more in line with the bottom of the shock absorber.

Connections for the cells could be made out of quick disconnect lines, once done with your trip, simply remove the cells and saddlebags from its mount on the shcok absorber, and also a possible saddle mount that runs under the passenger pillion.

Front mounting would be incorporated through the shock system, as the top spacer gives enough space to accomodate tie in, bottom would have a double loop over the bottom fastener and knuckle of the shock.

These openings of course would have to be isolated with rubber or silicone that would aid in reduction of vibration, more so when the cell runs dry.

The backs of the cells could be reinforced with flat aluminum stock, heavy enough to reinforce th ewhole system, but light enough to allow the bike to handle well. This would be in part due to the center of weight being near the rear axle, and not extended too far back from the rear axle central axis.

From measurements, it looks like that it would be quite possible to pick up 2 to 2.5 gallons added capacity, maybe more, maybe less.

Is there a market for something of this nature, and if so, what would folks think would be a reasonable price for a set up that just may come off looking good?

Anyone have access to do a cad drawing of this for further evaluation?

Check-out my "Aux. Fuel Sys." I 've done just what yo've described, bout a year ago. Works fine!

 

I would be interested in purchasing these fuel cells, I am not sure about the price though.

 

Rich the idea is plausible.
If you've viewed Max's post on the HD update document an seen the photo comparison of the Road-Rod tank to our tank you'll notice that they have optimized the shape of the lower part to get more overall volume. They could do the same with new tanks for us as well.
The addition of just 2" more height was not enough to get 1.5 extra gallons, though as with ours that figure may be optimistic since I've never been able to put more than 2.8 gallons in my 3.5 gallon tank.
Perhaps some saddle bags with integral fuel cell and quick disconnect would be an interesting option.

 

Perhaps some saddle bags with integral fuel cell and quick disconnect would be an interesting option.

There is indeed such an option discussed last year. It involved an external fuel pump, a transfer switch, and plumbing. I bought one of the plastic tanks discussed ($3.00 at Lowes) and it fits into the FPOS bags. But I'd lose the bag for carrying anything else, and just know that spills when filling it would ruin the bag forever for any other purpose. But it can be done (and now that I have the tourpak, I might make the sacrifice).

The "R" fuel cell is wider than ours, I believe, and thats probably where most of the extra capacity comes from.

 

I still think that a redesigned airbox, possibly combined with a redesign of the filter and filter box, could create an esthetically pleasing fuel cell/airbox cover (unlike the European ones posted). It would only need to hold 1-1/2 gallons, and could gravity feed into the tank. I am rather surprised no one has done it.

Fred

 

Perhaps some saddle bags with integral fuel cell and quick disconnect would be an interesting option.

Looks like Rollin' Hills has it in his gallery. Simple yet very effective, although Daniii is right on losing storage space. Looks like an option for now until Rich gets something figured out. Can you draw up something Rich just to get a visual of what you got goin'?

 

I still think that a redesigned airbox, possibly combined with a redesign of the filter and filter box, could create an esthetically pleasing fuel cell/airbox cover (unlike the European ones posted). It would only need to hold 1-1/2 gallons, and could gravity feed into the tank. I am rather surprised no one has done it.

Fred

You are correct Fred. If I could locate an appropriate top part of the fuel tank, I'd be willing to experiment with fiberglass. I do have some experience in that area. (I owned a 914 porsche for 20 years, and when it finally died it was about 60% fiberglass - that part having turned to a brown rock-like material.). Any idea where one can buy motorcycle gas tanks??

I may need a damaged airbox cover from someone as well, if only for the attachment points.

 

Whoa!!, I'm not talking about filling up a bag with a tank or jerry-can or even bladder type and take up storage space.
A redesign of any of the bag types to add about a 1" thick area behind the bag, the surface facing the tire, or as part of the bag. If it were the same size as the bag profile it should hold say 1/2 gallon minimum each side, more if you were creative with the nooks and crannies of unused space.
Properly vented and plumbed it would fill and drain with the stock tank.
No valves to operate just plug in the self sealing quick disconnects and go.
Hell I'm a CAD designer I could do it, as they say "In my spare time" and we all know how much of that there is.
If someone wants to donate a set of bags and mounting hardware to the effort then I'll be happy to look at it seriously, otherwise I'll shelve it with all my other "spare time" projects.
The only problem with the airbox topper idea, which I've also considered, is gravity, venting and valving and the fact that it is above the tank level.
Remember Archimedes, "fluids will always seek their own level".

 

Daniii, yes, my thought is that bags would work, but they would have to be manufactured to fit onto the space on the outside of the fuel cells.

One issue that I have relaized since posting this is the fact of swingarm travel upwards towards the rear of the shock absorber.

Even with thinly produced, thin, not as in wall thickness thin, but in internal size from side to side and end to end, and that is where swingarm upward travel would have to be inspected to determine the limit of movement to get the most space to use for cell placement, there should be enough room to put saddle bags on the outside of the cell, so as to cover the cell.

Then it would be on the ends, top and the bottm that anyone would be able to see any hardware. Properly designed bags of leather or glass could be made to have a lip to cover the hardware if desired. But if the cells are done in aluminum, rugged cells could be made, kept polished or satined at the owners discrecsion.

The quick disco is the way to go, with use of cable ties to lock the line down from the cells to the main tank. Since the cells could be determined temporary for travel, ties would work, or if one wanted to keep the cells on permanently, a more rigourious set up could be made.

I am wondering if the fuel pump in the stock tank has enough pull to draw from the cells too, so investigation into that would have to be done as well. Mounts for these lines would have to be designed to obtain the most fuel, and that would seem to be the rear most bottom for the pickup tube.

The trick is not to have a lot of excessive hardware, so fuel pump draw with a single pump would help eliminate more space requirement also.

There is plenty of space in the rear area to accomodate this set up for the cells and framework/brackets alone, but also, insuring that vibrations would be held to a minimum is always a concern, as well as side impact protection. If your traveling with saddle bags, its obvious whatever is in these bags would aid in side collision to a degree, and as such, I am unaware of fed standards for fuel cell outside of protective frame works standards and the requirement for safety. More research.

The legal stuff is always a concern, and as well, personally, I would truely dislike the thought of poorly designed fuel cells contributing to the immolation of someone who was riding and making use of them due to a side impact accident.

So I am not much of a proponent for hanging plastic tanks inside saddle bags, although the idea is there to get to the end goal. also, putting tanks in saddle bags eliminates that bag for clothes use or anything you'd personally need. Rollin Hills tanks are a start, but I think not an end to what could be made for sfety as well as long term use.

The idea is to have what I think is called saddle tanks that are solo and and their own. That way, saddle bag space can be used for what it was intended to carry your personal gear.

I am considering doing a mock up out of cardboard first, and then also using flat aluminum stack for the framework, to see if the frame work can be made rugged enough to carry 8 to 10 pounds on both sides without cracking, frame contact and stability. If that can be worked out, it is simple from there to pattern the tank walls and ends, then desing the bottoms to clear the caliper on one side, the belt guard on the other, and then have the set up welded, and then welded to a frame work that can be bolted to the mounting points previously listed.

The last feature of these aluminum cells would be stramlined or aircraft style or something just large enough to acocmodate a fill neck to work on the tank. I believe that a front mount small neck would work, but getting this too close to the shock assmely and potential passenger leg is a concern to. So thta may have to be located in the center, which may result in on circular bump extending outwards from the tank.

maybe if done properly, the bump ould be slim enough to protrude some to the back side to the front side to reduce the potential for an unapealing look.

What other questions i have though are:
1. What would be acceptable for capacity for these cells?

2. How far out would be too far out from the outer rear exhaust pipe for bags to go?
keep in mind what is considered acceptable for the exhaust side, would be the
same for th ebelt side, so a balanced look and a truely balanced feel would be
employed while riding.

3. Price range for these:
A. 200.00
B. 300.00
C. 400.00
D. 500.00

Since I am not up to speed on what manufacturer costs are, such as design, welding,
costs for fuel connectivity from one tank to the other, some basic guidline on costs for the system needs to be understood too.

Also, it just be a might possible to be able to use an aluminum nitrous tank for an external cell, and as I am not sure of those tank sizes, the cell is already made, only requiring the fuel connectivity and a little creativy tie into to the frame for mounting that.

The difference would be in the capability for carrying fuel of course, but if only a smidgin is needed for another 30 to 50 miles, the work might be overblown for the need too for what i have wrote of.

Identifying the goal is needed, so anyone wants to input there please do so.

rc4man, at this point no eye to take your time that is spare into a possible bottmless project, as there is too much to do at this point for rough in. I am going to spend time over the next week or so, after seeing what additional input folks here will give about this thought.Then I can sit down, drink a coffee or 2, and begin design on paper with pencil, and then finally to pattern for cardboard, After that point, I can calculate capacity based on what others would say would be the "right" size, and then, only then attempot to go further with it.

If it proves to work, hard patterns would need to be made, as the requirement for clearance for the liitle bulbious details of rear assemblt components would need to be finessed by machine. The first few could be hand made, but if it becam a production thing, its obvious that the hands are not as quick as the eye.

Have to crawl first, walk next and then prepare to run.

ANy web sites that list quick disco components?

 

Now that we know the MOCO isn't looking at a new air box cover to increase capacity, ( and won't now, ever) and since the new fuel tank is an impossibility in our frames, it looks like we are going to either pony up for an "R" (and start over with the mods...) or come up with something ourselves. I'd like another 1.5 gallons so I could ride with "the big boys".
I know I can do the saddlebag thing like our friend in Fla, if I don't mind never using the saddlebag for anything that won't absorb the inevitable odor from the inevitable gas spill. Your side mount cells seem like a good idea, but they would either have to both fill and empty from the underseat fuel neck, or have separate fuel loaders (yet more spilled gas). If the transfer hoses were large enough, the fuel pump issue would be moot. I suspect the immersed pump has little suction capability, and the plumbing would be a nightmare (the factory has enough trouble with their stock plumbing inside the tank).

So the conformal tank again pops to the top of my list.

Whatever we do, if we can provide simple suggestions (sorta like instructions) from available components, the liability is hopefully minimized. When I think of all the gas leaks I had on the old BSA (that fiberglas tank COULD NOT be sealed - believe me I tried - even the cream sealer would leak after a few weeks / miles whichever came first), I think the liability /danger may be overstated. I will be looking at creating a model for a gravity feed auxiliary tank. Maybe one hidden in a tank bag! Anyone seen a low flat plastic gas can for sale?

 

Daniii: There is a woman making covers for fuel cells and tank bags. She could make one that fits on our airbox cover (with lots of padding).

http://www.customtankbags.com/

 

I am wondering if the fuel pump in the stock tank has enough pull to draw from the cells too, so investigation into that would have to be done as well. Mounts for these lines would have to be designed to obtain the most fuel, and that would seem to be the rear most bottom for the pickup tube.

Rich,
If the the elevation of the cells is below the tank filler and above the tank bottom then no pump is required, just connected hoses top and bottom to fill and vent to the existing tank.

 

There is apparently a place called Fat Tanks in Orange Cty Calif (dale - Fat Tanks at 982 North Batavia, Unit B-2,Orange, CA 92867 Orange, CA 92865 (714) 744-4722 , 800 582-2274, http://www.fattank.com) that make custom tanks. I've tried calling (got p-mail) but will continue trying. Another source is FatKatz (520-273-2212) I'll be calling them as well.

I was told that the Virago also has a capacity limit due to a tank below the seat. If so, others have looked at this problem. If I could find a low flat aux gas tank, it would probably fit into a number of (non-magnetic) tank bags. The anodized tanks are pretty scratch resistant. I have had a tank bag on for over 3000 miles, with no scratches. But Fred, your painted tank probably wouldn't survive 10 miles.

 

Daniii: My neighbor is a 3 M Rep. I can get a role of the clear 3M tape they use for Car Bras if I put a bag on it. So far have not had the need for one except as a map holder.

Fred

 

That'll work. I hope to hear back from one of the tank guys. I'll keep everyone posted.

 

Rich,
If the the elevation of the cells is below the tank filler and above the tank bottom then no pump is required, just connected hoses top and bottom to fill and vent to the existing tank.

Heres my thought on the pickup portion. On the inside panel or wall of the cell, there would be a rtube that would be supported by braces, and welded to the wall with an opening baout an inch or so from the bootom. This tube would lead to the top inside of the tank, and have a nipple that could be connected to a quick disco, provided these are push/pull type.

Or the second thought is to have the connection on the bootom of the cell, where space/clearance issues are bypassed. The line would have to run to the OEM tank to provide a way for fuel to be transeferred up into the main tank, or to be pulled uphill by the stock fuel pump. Putting transfer pumps into a compartment with swithces and then guages for each tank woulod add a nightmare to the instrument cluster, where to mount, swithches, wiring etc.

So i am wonder, would the stock pump or how would the stockl pum pull from the bootm cells then finish whats in the top stock oem tank...or is that vice versa.

SOmehow, coupling the cells together into the main tank has to be dealt with, and I am not sure if marine tank fittings such as seen on outboard motor tanks would work, and thats just the mechanical parts, not a tube with a pump ball to prime the fuel system.

When one thinks about drilling the staock tank for line connection, problems arise for safety. Sure, they could be sealed, but what about follow up maintenence, and then getting to the component inside the stock tank? not sure htta is even possible. So the alternate is to go in through the top of the OEM tank cover with a new line, but how to connect to the OEM fule pump to allow the stock tank and cells to work in harmony without swithches and other pumps?

Sinc eht ecells would be the lowest point of gravity, would the fuel then go to that point, and act to drain the main tank first (Yes, I am sure of that) and then work on the fuel in the saddle tanks?

I also have figured out a way to mock up one cell that will permit me to ID the amount of fuel one of the cells could hold.

There is a material called sentra, thin wall PVC that can be worked with a heat gun to make bends, folds and push ins for things the would be obtrusive to a smooth design. The sentra can be glued with Liquid Nails, then filled with water to calculate the amount of liquid one cell could hold.

For something for so few gallons, takes a lot of design thought and ideas to perfect it. In the end, i am sure a beasty system that can stand up to the road for a long time could be produced. I was thinking also, how about aluminum saddle bags? On compartment is for clothes, the other for fuel?

Leakage or sepage from overflow is a concern by doing this too, but with proper design I feel that the problem could be overcome.

More on this later, I am running out of time for this for now. I have a Drs appointment in a little bit, and need to wrap up some reports.

Thanks for the input guys, keep it coming, as I think with ideas will come results that could make the bikes we currently own long distance machines without worrying about fuel stops every 50 minutes. I travel at over 100 MPH on the rod when i can, and it sucks fuel like crazy, so I know for myself, it would be a welcome relief even on a small island in the Pacific.

 

Well, well, well; it sounds like if Harley can't (make that won't) do it, then the guys from the forum will!

 

Hey Rich, keep the hope up!

Well, here is another concept.

Replace the stock passenger seat with an enlarged fuel cell shaped to appropriate length, width and height to give at least 2+ gallons. It would use gravity to drain into the main cell and would still allow the current use of saddle bags for their intended purpose.

The down side:
a) Loss of passenger seat
b) Safety issue from ramming from behind incident perhaps?
c) Stock rear fender may have to go.

The up side side:
a) the fender can be enlarged to fit quite a volume tank, especially if a 240 wide tire is fitted, giving an enlarged area to work on. I have not worked it out fully but it would be nice to get 3+ gallons.
b) Gravity fed; no fuel pump complications
c) Maintains use of saddle bags
d) Only the rear fender is affected; all else stays the same facilitating maintenance

It is also possible to make it detachable, so that it can be taken off when you want to use a passenger and put it back on when going long. To dream even further, who knows, it might be possible to have two versions of this: A 2 gallon and a 4 gallon version -- if the space is there.

I guess you can tell, this pygmy tank has all dreaming in cloud nine! Any thoughts?

 

I was watching the Making of the v-rod and caught someone saying that they had to make the Exhaust 16 liters to meet EPA noise regulations.

Well we dont need no stinking EPA noise regs so here an Idea I have not seen yet
make a real 2 in to 1 like Jamiemacs mod in the third volume but instead of spliting it back to 2 leave it as one. use stock the upper muffler only V-modded . plumb and cap lower muffler as an Auxilary tank.

I think the heat could be managed.
the posibility is that you could have over 2 gallons extra and I would have no ugly factor The biggest concern woud be about 16 extra pounds on one side tell me what you think

 

Hey Rich, keep the hope up!

Well, here is another concept.

Replace the stock passenger seat with an enlarged fuel cell shaped to appropriate length, width and height to give at least 2+ gallons. It would use gravity to drain into the main cell and would still allow the current use of saddle bags for their intended purpose.

The down side:
a) Loss of passenger seat
b) Safety issue from ramming from behind incident perhaps?
c) Stock rear fender may have to go.

The up side side:
a) the fender can be enlarged to fit quite a volume tank, especially if a 240 wide tire is fitted, giving an enlarged area to work on. I have not worked it out fully but it would be nice to get 3+ gallons.
b) Gravity fed; no fuel pump complications
c) Maintains use of saddle bags
d) Only the rear fender is affected; all else stays the same facilitating maintenance

It is also possible to make it detachable, so that it can be taken off when you want to use a passenger and put it back on when going long. To dream even further, who knows, it might be possible to have two versions of this: A 2 gallon and a 4 gallon version -- if the space is there.

I guess you can tell, this pygmy tank has all dreaming in cloud nine! Any thoughts?

One at a time guys.

If your not double up, the system behind the operator makes sense, could even be cut into a backreast type tank, then lined and padded. The top could give an extra dimension in added luggage capacity if needed.

The downside you've pointed out is the fact of the loss of the passenger. Myself, I travel double up, so that makes the mileage situation even worse with a loaded bike. Instead of enjoying a high 30 or low 40 MPG, I think I come in at a high 20. I have not really watched close, cause there are fuel stops all over the island. I get about 125 miles to the tank before required fuel stop, but thta is mostly city and freeway work.

However, since I may try to get to Kansas this year, so I do have an underlying reason to work this through, and the end result could be a reward for all who want to go the same route.

Nothing like letting the cat out of the bag, but the project to me is a worthy one to get a working unit that could be palusable for manufacture and sale.

So people like me who have a spouse that insists on riding on the back, need to get a result that can let them continue to ride on the bike, or that marriage discourse becomes a biger nag.

 

I was watching the Making of the v-rod and caught someone saying that they had to make the Exhaust 16 liters to meet EPA noise regulations.

Well we dont need no stinking EPA noise regs so here an Idea I have not seen yet make a real 2 in to 1 like Jamiemacs mod in the third volume but instead of spliting it back to 2 leave it as one. use stock the upper muffler only V-modded . plumb and cap lower muffler as an Auxilary tank.

I think the heat could be managed.
the posibility is that you could have over 2 gallons extra and I would have no ugly factor The biggest concern woud be about 16 extra pounds on one side tell me what you think

At first thought, using the space is a great idea, but here is a fact to consider, the higher temperature fuel hits, the progress of vapor builds, and can cause issues with the fuel as it tries to travel from one location to another.

One trick way back when to aid in reducing fuel temps was to have a can with the fuel line coiled inside it, and fill the can with ice, so the fuel comes in in "more liquid and tighter molecular structure" than less as a vapor from heat, and aiding then in a bigger bang per combustion cycle.

If the heat could be controlled, the result then would be one of potential. So close to the header though leaves doubt as to what may occur.

Pointing out the 16 pounds on one side would be considered manageable, as long as you remember that your adding that weight, and then when the weight is gone, to think about that too.

One factor though is to try to keep the weight over the axle, by doing so, I think better displacement would be found on the bike resulting in a combinatin of the ability to handle the weight whilst the bike still would be able to handle well. Going into the center area would be optimum, specifically where the current tank is located, but we all know what disadvantage current owners face with that dillema.

 

I still think that a redesigned airbox, possibly combined with a redesign of the filter and filter box, could create an esthetically pleasing fuel cell/airbox cover (unlike the European ones posted). It would only need to hold 1-1/2 gallons, and could gravity feed into the tank. I am rather surprised no one has done it.

Fred

Hi Fred-Just have two thoughts about the air-box rig. # 1 where are you going to vent the tank? can't use the existing tank vent, cause' you're aux tank is higher than the main tank., and also you'll need that access to the tank for transfer from the new aux. tank unless you run another line. # 2- if you transfer to the main tank, where would you put the petcock, where it would be accesable, yet not unsightly? I'am not tryin' to bust yer' bubble here, I'am just trying to see it. Thanks-Bob

 

Rollin - I'd vent the aux tank through the aux tank filler! But you are right, I'll need another vent for the main tank if I fill it throgh the existing vent port. I'll probably have to run a separate vent, or add another port to the top of the existing tank. I'd put the petcock down opposite the ignition switch, on the other side. Thanks for the heads-up.

 

Rollin - I'd vent the aux tank through the aux tank filler! But you are right, I'll need another vent for the main tank if I fill it throgh the existing vent port. I'll probably have to run a separate vent, or add another port to the top of the existing tank. I'd put the petcock down opposite the ignition switch, on the other side. Thanks for the heads-up.

As you know from my write-up about my aux. sys. I use the existing vent as an inlet from the pump discharge. Also the new vent for The main tank, is achived by removing the cap diffusuion plate in the cap of the tank, and drilling a 1/32" hole in the cap itself. NO- it does not leak. I believe this would work in just about any tank mod. mentioned regardless of the fuel source. I'am well aware my system is crude, however it's worked for about a year with no problems. Thanks for your forthright and inteligent input. Ride-on!