The OEM pulley returns the clutch plate to the stops when the magnetism is switched off, the plate having only moved .012/.016" away from the stops when the clutch was pulled against the magnet.
Somehow someone says that it is OK that the so called springs on their after market pulley do not return the plate to sit against the stops, this leaves the plate in a position that may or may not be parallel to the magnet, the initial setting is much greater than the .012/.016" OEM setting this is to allow the springs to find their own position, the final setting being done when the so called springs have been stretched due to their use. I contend that if this has to happen then they are not springs in the first place. Any after market pulley should act like the OEM ones when set up. I do not know if this issue was solved later by making the so called springs actually springs.

For springs to last a long time the amount of deflection should be kept to a minimum. You will notice on the OEM springs that the force to move the plate of the stops is considerable, without the stops being there the springs would move the plate very close to the pulley face.

Why your pulley shows such a large gap is hard to say, the shims are there to make up for tolerance build ups in the components. Torquing the bolt would not solve anything. Measuring the depth of the bearing from the plate face and measuring the end of the SC shaft to the magnet would give you the gap you see now. A depth micrometer would be needed to do it accurately though.

The clutch plate wears over time but I would not have thought so much as to give your gap. My spare pulley clutch plate with less than 2,000 miles on it is .198 (5,00 mm) the original black surface is still to be seen on most areas of the contact face. The depth of the inner bearing face to the plate face is 1.020 (25,90 mm).

 

Thanks for those measurements 180 and the info on the depth micrometer. This OEM pulley is presently stuck on the shaft pretty good and I am going to have to devise a two-halfved grooved wrap around puller of some sort to get it off without damaging it. I somehow didn't stop my mechanic when I noticed him not emory clothing or lightly oiling the shaft before assembly and it went on tight.This may or may not be related to the excessive gap that I ended up with. The videos I have seen of pulley removal and reinstallation show the assembly going together like butter.
I will add that I drove my other (stock pulley)SRT (black one ) this morning to notice any differences, and I am beginning to think that the replaced SC (on the SSB) is definitely engaging differently and quite possibly slipping. There is a noticeable difference in power predominately in the 1500 to 2500 rpm range comparing the two. Also, comparing the two mating surfaces of the failed pulley to the used OEM pulley, I noticed a different angle of bevel to the outer edge which may have given me the indication of wear on the used OEM pulley when the non beveled portion may be the correct thickness. Either way, the replaced pulley will need to come off and the oversized gap issue addressed. I will be using the failed pulley and its grooves to help in the design of the puller I will need to get the replaced OEM off of the shaft. I used the bearing that was recommended by NW. Was it too thick? I no longer have the box it came in I will have to check the invoice to see exactly which bearing he shipped to see if a mistake was made. I'll let you know...thanks again.

 

These bearings are pretty much standard in their sizes, so the size should not be a problem. Measure the thickness of the clutch plate it should be 5 mm (.197") less the wear it has suffered.

 

They are both very close to 5 mm. It was difficult to measure the used OEM one because it is in place, but it seemed awefull close to 5 mm, so, with the wear issue out of the way now, something else is making the pulley standoff gap too great. I went to see a machinist friend and he showed me a shaft collar and said they were available at McMaster dot com, so I took a look and they have an extra wide shaft collar that may be what I need to enable me to attach a puller to the pulley and get it off of the shaft. It was a two piece collar however the insides were smooth and not grooved.

 

Two-piece shaft collar, 3inch bore, 7/8 wide, will have to work, it's on the way. There will be enough bore diameter to use an old rubber printing blanket between the two to better the grip and protect the grooves when I tighten the collar around the SC pulley. I will have to deal with what I expect to find as a gaulled shaft when I get it off. Wish me luck

 

The shaft collar worked perfectly in removing the stuck pulley. The shaft was NOT scored. We were able to bang the bearing into the pulley slightly deeper allowing for a slightly closer fit of the pulley. After prepping the shaft, the pulley did indeed go on like butter. Although not as close as spec would like it to be, I think it will have to do. With the added scattershield during this procedure, I am now confident that the grenaded pulley issue is fully behind me and its on to further upgrades. I think that a new IC pump couldn't hurt things at all. Oh, and a fresh solder job for the RCM wouldn't hurt. It gave a check engine code today for its first time. I swapped it with one that TighEd had done from one of the other xfires so I can send it out....Peace 'yall

 

Surely pushing the bearing farther into the pulley moves the clutch plate closer to the front of the car, effectively increasing the gap between the clutch plate and the magnet.
I measured my spare pulley and found that the bearing had very little clearance, a .001" feeler would not go in front or behind the bearing. Another spare bearing measured .0015" under 23 mm (.9055") making it .9040" thick.
So my bearing could not be moved by any significant amount if I was to try.

 

Quote--"Surely pushing the bearing farther into the pulley moves the clutch plate closer to the front of the car, effectively increasing the gap between the clutch plate and the magnet." Are we seeing things differently? I see quite the opposite. The further the bearing sits into the pulley, until it is flush with the snap-ring the further it will slide onto the shaft until it meets the step in the shaft where the shims would go, if the fit was too close and needed more space. As I said, it seems to be performing better than it was with the larger gap. Thanks for the input 180.

 

Quote:

Are we seeing things differently? I see quite the opposite. The further the bearing sits into the pulley, until it is flush with the snap-ring the further it will slide onto the shaft until it meets the step in the shaft where the shims would go, if the fit was too close and needed more space. As I said, it seems to be performing better than it was with the larger gap. Thanks for the input 180.

I agree with what you are saying in general but that is not what you said before.

Quote:

We were able to bang the bearing into the pulley slightly deeper allowing for a slightly closer fit of the pulley

To hit the snap ring the bearing has got to be farther out, because it went in from the snap ring end.
The bearing sits in the same position on the SC shaft, so only the pulley can move forward or back by a very small amount due to the tight tolerances. I estimate the total amount of movement as less than .003".

 

Right again 180. Thanks. There was a shim that had been captured at the break on the failed aluminum pulley that we never saw until we went back and looked one more time and there it was. The shim that goes in before the bearing from the snap ring end, then the bearing gets dropped in and the snap ring goes on. This caused the two surfaces to move together so close that they rubbed and other shimming was required with different shims to move the pulley/bearing assembly further out to get where we needed to be. It's all good now and the performance is quite acceptable now. We were seeing things differently, then I went and looked again. Thanks again for the help. Now I have to decide which project is next. I still have 3 sets of speakers in all 3 of my xfires to replace and upgrade. That should be fun...Peace