How to properly design LC bandpass filters?
You have given enough parameters to design the required filter:

source termination 50 ohms
load termination 50 ohms
bandwidth 200 kHz
center frequency 1.81 Mhz

Any number of &quot;applets&quot; can design this filter. I have used &quot;ttc08&quot; that was included with EMRFD Experimental Methods for Radio Frequency Design. One is given a choice of inductor values (all inductors are the same). Capacitor values are internally calculated to achieve the desired filter.
In this case, a &quot;standard value&quot; inductor of 4.7 uH is chosen. One must be careful to choose a low-loss inductor so that its &quot;Q&quot; is far higher than the filter &quot;Q&quot;. The filter Q in this case is roughly center frequency divided by bandwidth (about ten). An inductor Q of about 100 is assumed. Capacitor Q is usually assumed infinite at this low frequency:



simulate this circuit &ndash; Schematic created using CircuitLab
Could this be built with surface-mount components? 4.7uH of sufficiently-high Q might be a bit of a problem sourcing.
Those odd-value capacitors may have to be parallel or series combinations of standard values. All component tolerances should be tight with this fairly high-Q filter. Filter bandwidth is slightly less than the desired 200 kHz due to finite component Q. A filter having higher Q than 10 might benefit from trimming components added to C2, C6. All capacitor values here are fairly well-defined by bulk capacitors. At higher frequency, stray coupling and stray capacitance make trimmers/tuning mandatory.
LTspice is a good tool to verify a filter. One can vary component tolerances to gain a sense of how badly filter characteristics are degraded. But LTspice is not adequate to show how a filter should be constructed to reduce component-to-component coupling, or estimating reactance of printed-circuit traces that you think are inconsequential. That is a matter of experience.
It may seem that this filter differs from the capacitive-tap matching used in the OP's schematic. It is really not so different...C1 and C2 have roughly similar ratio to OP's C1 &amp; C2.
What is missing from OP's schematic is the 50 ohm source resistance. Note that V1 generates a voltage that divides between R1 (50 ohms) and R5 (50 ohms), so that filter output within the pass band never rises above 0.5V when V1 is 1V. The resistive losses of the three inductors add about another 1 dB attenuation to this -6dB. (total of -7dB)


A brain fart caused me to choose the (above) filter's center frequency to be 1.81 MHz., instead of geometric mean of lower &amp; upper frequency edge - which should be near 1.9 MHz. That's \$ \sqrt{1.8 \times 2.0} \$
This error is an opportunity to see how/which components change value, and by how much. Re-evaluating the resulting filter helps give you a feeling for component sensitivity. The &quot;Q&quot; value for the standard-value inductor was also reduced from 100 to 60, to reflect achievable Q of SMT inductors:



simulate this circuit
 Note that R2,R3,R5 in this revised filter are equivalent loss resistance of the associated inductor, and are not components to be added. These increased losses added another few decibels to filter passband attenuation.