Attached are two pictures I took of my Saratoga with the engine cover removed.
The #1 cylinder picture clearly shows that the #1 cyl cooling vents are completely exposed to the incoming airstream.
The #2 cylinder picture sort of shows that the front baffling blocks the first three layers of the cooling vents from the incoming airstream (the baffling does continue down into the shadowed area). You do not need to be a rocket scientist to conclude that this explains why the #2 cylinder always has the highest CHT.
#2 CHT is always the limitation when leaning during ROP operation. Probably costs us 1-2 Gal per hour, which at today's fuel costs is significant.
I have already put in a request to Piper to research this problem, and perhaps issue a fix. Suggestion: Remove the bottom half of the attached side baffling piece). I encourage others to do so as well.
But check your sensor on that cylinder to be sure, although small changes can make a big difference it isn't always the case, especially since its one of the front cylinders, its often the more posterior ones which tend to suffer high temps. Although there is suggestion that airflow towards the back of the engines is moving in a circular motion by this point and has greater cooling capacity.
What about your fuel metering, is yours independantly or collectively mixture controlled? I imagine collectively.
I guess I should clarify that I was encouraging others to write to Piper, and not to make unauthorized changes!
Anyway, after more research, according to Piper. the air cooling was designed for worst-case climb-out conditions, and yes, #2 cyl apparently does not need as much cooling as the other cyclinders during climb out.
So best to leave as it is, and keep an eye on the #2 cyl temps during cruise.
