I would like to do a little survey; which tank do you like better and why ?
79-80 or 81-82 ? Your opinions please .
Tanks
-
- ICOA Member
- Posts: 4080
- Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 9:12 am
- Location: St. Catharines, On. Canada
- Location: St. Catharines, On. Canada
Re: Tanks
To my eyes nicer lines/curves on the Prolink and i also prefer the look of the filler cap.
- bobcat
- Power Poster
- Posts: 423
- Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:35 pm
- Location: Dallas Texas
- Location: Dallas Texas
-
- ICOA Member
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:29 pm
- Location: Clinton Twp, Michigan
- Location: Clinton Twp., Michigan, USA
Re: Tanks
It really doesn't matter since there isn't a choice.
If you have a twin shock - the side panels, seat and tail dictate the early tank.
If is a ProLink, you have the larger capacity tank with the indents for the different seat, side panels and tail for those models.
The only way there's a choice is if you're building a custom bike, and when you can just do what you want. If that's the case, I'll take the ProLink tank every time. The extra width keeps everything in visual proportion.
If you have a twin shock - the side panels, seat and tail dictate the early tank.
If is a ProLink, you have the larger capacity tank with the indents for the different seat, side panels and tail for those models.
The only way there's a choice is if you're building a custom bike, and when you can just do what you want. If that's the case, I'll take the ProLink tank every time. The extra width keeps everything in visual proportion.
-
- ICOA Member
- Posts: 10151
- Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:55 am
- Location: North East OH, ICOA 3904
Re: Tanks
Maybe neither. I have a couple of spare CB1100R tanks, they are aluminum, and adapted one to my 1980 project. Have to take a picture of the repainted black tank on the bike.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.