I wonder why they did that.


They should have left the same or should have increased it and not reduce it, i just cann't understand the way they think.

 

Maybe because the fuel injected 700 is more fuel efficient so therefore not needing as bigger tank???? not sure, jsut a thought.

 

Some of the EFI machines have the fuel pump in the tank. If that's the case, I'd wager that's why the overall capicity decreased.

 

yep. i recall them saying it was in the tank, thus reducing capcity. i have heard that it is better on fuel than the dual carbed ones though...

 

I go riding with my cousin on his Rappy 700 and there's no worries about the smaller tank. It has a good range between fill up's.

 

they should all come with a 5 gallon tank!!!

 

i agree[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

 

Ive never had a problem running out of gas on mine. Ive got a heavy throttle, and the mods listed in my signature. Ive seen the gas light come on 2 or 3 times when we go way out in the dunes of Glamis draggin up Olds repeatedly.

The pump is in fact, in the tank. Why Suzuki put an external one on the 450 is beyond me.

When I had a ported Banshee, I ran out of gas quite often with the 3.1 or 3.2 tank on it. All my friends with Banshees run the IMS 5.3 galllon tank. Now those bikes with the 34mm Plus carbs can put away some fuel!!!!

 

dude a stock banshee drinks gas too! i had to go back to camp more than once to fill up when i had mine. they rip and they are fun, but the 450R, doing the same stuff never runs out on a day of riding. if i fill it up when we go back to the truck its a choice not a requirement... but any 2 stroke by the very nature of the engine design is going to drink more gas that a 4 stroke. and typically fuel injection is more fuel efficient than carbs...

i know every bike i currently have has a carb, but the next one i get hopefully wont. i cant stand carbs! the day is coming when all of them will have EFI.