The diameter of the rivet should be a tight fit in the holes, if it is not a tight fit then just riveting over the head of the rivet will not hold the two parts together without angular movement between the parts.

When some movement is required lengthwise on such a rivet it has to be tight on one side and a sliding fit on the other, both sides would require more depth to the hole to give strength and reduce wear. The rivet would be two pieces, the rivet and a washer type head.

The first blows on a simple rivet are to swell the diameter so that it is a very tight fit. Rivets are best in shear situations and require the tight fit or they can elongate the holes and weaken the head.
That's basic riveting 101.

From what I have seen on this forum many of these C3's are a POS and not worth the money they cost, anyone making newer designs would be wise to learn from the mistakes of the old design and poor workmanship.

 

I don't have a clue either Les, that's why I asked. I thought maybe you found a master machinist down there somewhere that knew his $hit. I'm trying to learn about these SC pulleys because I'm considering EC's new 65mm pulley they will have out soon. After reading 180's above post I'm having to re-evaluate. I've heard from some that the SC pulley can sometimes have driveability issues, like kicking in a bit harsh; is this the rivet issue? Perhaps it was just an isolated few that had issues I don't know, just trying to make the right choice between the new 65mm SC pulley and an ASP 178 pulley. I know; it's an old debate. I'd also like to know how EC is doing it better than the C3, or is it just a copy? Will have to wait and see.

 

Weird, I have never heard of drivability issues with a SC pulley. As far as the build quality, the only thing I have heard of/read was the grooves wearing the belt slightly on the Code3 (Gen 1) SC pulley and a few that needed to change out the bearing (Gen1 & 2). But that will happen with any pulley after time as they are all using the OEM bearing. You have to take into consideration the individual use of each it item also. ie: velociabstract autocrosses his car quite a bit, so he would be on/off with the supercharger a lot during his races. Just my .02

 

I should have written issue, not issues, as it was limited to the harsh engagement only that I heard mentioned. Other than that, the only negative thing I've heard is Les's rattle and onehundred80 calling them a "POS", lol.

 

Code 3 always had quality control issues from what I remember but no drivability quirks on my car. Some owners returned the pulleys for clearance problems between the pulley and clutch. My pulley wasn't square to the clutch but worked fine so I kept it. Then Code 3 disappeared. The shop that pressed in the bearing aggravated the "out of round" and loose condition. If it doesn't come apart, which I don't see happening, it's staying on the car for now but I think it's going to the junk pile sooner than later. It rattles at idle but I can't hear it while driving. Perhaps when the supercharger is engaged it doesn't move on the rivets. One thing is certain, after driving with the stock pulley for a few days, I'm addicted to boost. Choices: Fix it, 178, 181, 185, Eurocharged Code 3 style pulley or be unhappy. I went with the Code 3 for one reason and one reason only. I could do it myself. Every time a shop touches my car something goes wrong. Paying for a shop to do damage ...... No words.

Les