So I submit again...is there any possibility that the timing spike was put in intensionally to challenge detonation? If you look at the graph (at least as I remember), it really is a spike. Which to me doesn't make sense. Why would they have it rise AND DROP so quickly right at 4K rpms? I would think the curve would be much more smooth if their direct intent was just to have as much timing as possible for power. But if they wanted to give a quick "touch" of very high timing (like quickly finger tapping a stove to see if it's hot or just how hot) to reveal to the learning mode of the ECM where det. will occur, that seems to make more sense.
I can't remember where I saw the timing graph, but if I recall correctly, the timing advance at ~ 6K rpms was about the same as it was at the spike. Maybe the ECU looks for det. during the spike, and then advances the timing later in the curve just below the point it saw det. at 4K rpms?
If that's true, then "max" power might be affected if they reduce the agressiveness of the learning tactic.
But really, my bet is that SOA will be smart enough to have a reflash that keeps the advertised performance stats...it has to or else they're in deep, deep poop (in the legal department).