eurogaguest1980 I tried the link you gave but could find no way to get a “free” analysis. Not an issue really but what do others use please which is somewhat simple to understand and provides a decent service?
The EGT spread doesn’t matter.
What is important is to make sure that all cylinders peak at the same time, when plotted against the common fuel flow. See here.
CHT spread will reflect how the baffling around the engine works (or doesn’t). The CHTs are very sensitive to the smallest gaps – see e.g. here.
I would be surprised if Savvy offered free analysis. They make money doing this.
The Continental IO 360 already has balanced injectors when it leaves the factory. NO need for GAMIs!
The EGT values are of no concern. Differences might occur due to slightly different positions on the exhaust.
Savvy costs 129 $ per year and is excellent(!) value for the money! You get free tech support and regular analysis on the likelyhood of exhaust valve failures based on the data you upload.
The graphics are for free btw.
So if it is thought that the baffles should be replaced on an old airframe, how does one get a “pattern” to manufacture from? The existing seals may be replacements from years ago and not to spec. so no point in using them.
The Continental IO 360 already has balanced injectors when it leaves the factory.
Very unlikely to have been actually done deliberately.
how does one get a “pattern” to manufacture from
With the lower cowling in place, by visual inspection of where the gaps are.
Fenland_Flyer wrote:
Continental IO360 KB1B
Gami supports this engine with custom injectors. I would expect much improved performance and smoother operations with the Gamijectors.
cessnatraveller wrote:
The Continental IO 360 already has balanced injectors when it leaves the factory. NO need for GAMIs!
Are you positive about that? I don’t see it specified in the TCM spec sheet. The air delivery is an improvement over the IO520 series because it is overhead and individual plenums so fuel doesn’t get transported from one cylinder to an adjacent cylinder. So it should have a lower requirement for balanced injectors, but from the evidence in the OP engine analyzer, fuel flow balance isn’t working with the existing injectors.
I am no engineer so learn by asking here on EuroGA. How do Gami injectors differ from TCM injectors. Are the TCM ones not manufactured accurately? What about differences, as slight as they may be, in the different cylinders? How will Gami cope with that or am I being unrealistic?
CHT seems to be on the top of everyone’s list but wide variations in what is thought acceptable/good.
GAMI injectors are mostly the manufacturer’s injectors. They are measured by GAMI for the precise fuel flow at a given pressure. So when you buy a set of GAMIs, they are merely selling you standard Lyco or Conti injectors, selected to even up the power delivery of your respective cylinders.
So you may ask: why do GAMI need an STC, when all they are doing is what you might get with a standard engine, purely by accident?
They need an STC because in some cases they can’t get the required flow rate with a standard injector, or they don’t have any handy of that size. So they bore one out. That is a modification.
The other reasonf for an STC is that many mechanics are illiterate/obstinate and can’t (or won’t) read the regs, and an STC gives them a nice warm feeling 
It’s like an STC for a Concorde battery; their STCs are also purely for what is basically marketing.
With good baffling you should be able to keep CHTs below 400F at all times. I used to struggle to keep mine below 450F in Greece during climbs at +35C but since I reworked the baffles (link above) this dropped a lot.
