When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Thanks guys for the help. So it's 5/16 for sure? Also thanks for the site. I think I'm going to go with the ZLC series because according to colder's site, they're intended use is for fuel lines. So these are the ones I'm going to go with one and two. Thanks for all of your help.
Mine is 1/4" ID and I don't think I've ever seen a fuel pump on a bike and if you got rid of it how would the gas get to the other side? I'm not sure about newer model bikes. I have a 94, 95 and 2000. Just a note. I have never had to pull a tank so maybe a waste of money.
Last edited by Panasoffkee; Nov 15, 2009 at 08:40 PM.
Just about any engine work or getting at the electrics under their requires removing the tank. Sometimes you can get by with just lifting it a little and propping it up. With the quick disconnect it just makes that part of the process clean and quick. Even changing the bars can require the tank removal to get at the throttle lines or wiring or just to make it easier.
If you're paying a shop to do the work then you might also be saving money since that's less time to work on it.
Thanx for the insight. I'll put this in the data bank as you neverknow when you may need the info. Thanx again
I did some more research and the diameter is for a fact 5/16". Is it a waste of money, to some maybe, but not for me. I do all of my own work and I'm also planning to do some electrical wiring and it would make things much easier. Thanks for all of your help.
Well I want to put a quick disconnect fuel crossover on my bike and was wondering what the correct diameter is? The choices are 1/4", 5/16", and 3/8". Also, this might be a dumb question but is the crossover necessary? I know it connects the two halves of the gas tank up front, but the fuel pump is in the back (I think), so the fuel will get to it the same, regardless if it's there or not. I'm thinking it just allows the fuel gauge to give an accurate reading. If that's the case, then I could get rid of it entirely. Well that's just a thought. Your help is appreciated.
Did anybody decide if you can just get rid of the crossover, especially if you use a tank lift? Don't know how high the bump inside the tank at the back is to know how much lift would let all the gas cross to the other side. Anyone seen the insides of the 5 gal. tank?
[quote=Theo;5854361]I did some more research and the diameter is for a fact 5/16". Is it a waste of money, to some maybe, but not for me. I do all of my own work and I'm also planning to do some electrical wiring and it would make things much easier.[quote]
Theo: Did you ever purchase and install the quick connect in the fuel cross over line? Which clamps did you use? Any issues I should be aware of?
Theo: Did you ever purchase and install the quick connect in the fuel cross over line? Which clamps did you use? Any issues I should be aware of?
Hey sorry it took me so long to respond. I've been away from this site for a while. Yes I purchased the quick disconnects and they work flawlessly. The ones I purchased were LCD17005V & LCD22005V from quickcoupling.net. There were no issues really. I ran the tank to almost empty. And then I used a hand siphon pump to remove the rest of the gas. Also, make sure to buy some 5/16" fuel hose and hose clamps as well (you'll need 4 to be exact). Let me know if you have any other questions. Good luck.
-Theo
It's definitely 5/16. I have the herko quick disconnect with the viton seals ($35 shipped if anyone wants it, pm me). I decided to not use it, as I don't take my tank off often enough.
Another option is simply a brass ****** splicer and two hemostats. Cheaper and less chance of a leak but not as convenient.
Me. I'll stick with the coupling's. I do take my tanks off often enough to make it worthwhile to have the coupling in the crossover tube.
I've already done it to my bagger and there was plenty of room but I'm seeing the Softail is a bit tighter. Just means it's more important to do it on the Softy than the bagger.
Last edited by BoomerBob; Jan 9, 2010 at 12:24 AM.
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Slideshow: The bar-and-shield logo shows up on far more than motorcycles, some of the company's most unexpected products have nothing to do with riding.
Slideshow: From the troubled AMF years to modern misfires, these bikes earned reputations for reliability issues, questionable engineering, or disappointing performance.
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Slideshow: The Swiss custom shop has taken a Harley Softail and stretched it into something so long and low that it looks closer to a rolling sculpture than a conventional motorcycle.
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Slideshow: A standard cruiser becomes an intricate metal canvas in the hands of a Swiss custom house known for pushing Harley-Davidson platforms far beyond their factory brief.
Slideshow: Harley-Davidson's challenges aren't abstract; they show up in dropping shipments, shrinking dealer traffic, and strategic decisions that aren't yet translating into growth.