I'm not saying that the entire automotive world is stupid, and I'm not saying that *I* came up with anything.  That's a leap you made, not me, prj.  I'm far too humble a person to ever go down that road.  This is a hobby for me, while a vocation for others, and I understand the difference.  I asked for some help and gave some reasons why I wanted to do what I wanted to do, which is generally how such things are done.  I have indeed done 'real world tests.'  Quite a few, actually.  I see an effect that appears to hold with respect to *my* specific setup, under *my* specific circumstances, and I want to do some more experimentation to see if I can improve on it.  Nothing more and nothing less.  As I said, I haven't found the end-point yet, and *adding* timing may prove to be the most beneficial of all.  I'm not counting that out.

I looked at it both ways, boost vs. RPM and boost vs. time.  Things are not always what they first appear to be; that's a basic tenet of scientific approach.  I'll post logs -- I'm on a different computer at the moment and don't have them with me.

I understand true anti-lag.  My wife isn't going to be doing that when she drives, and I don't have much interest in it, either.  At least, not as a general practice.

Matchew was a big help, as was printing the entire disassembly to aid in searching.  I won't say I definitely don't need any help at all any longer, but I'm a lot farther than I was, at least.

I totally agree with prj.

reducing timing gives you better spool, but cuts torque and efficiency a lot more.

What about your afr? a leaner mixture in low rpms should give some better spool without killing torque and efficiency. I dont know ow far you enrich at what pedl position at the moment. Might this solve the probs a bit?