Back in the bad old days of point type kettering ignitions a static timing would be sufficient to develop an advance curve mainly because you have references to work from (points opening and TDC established), and with a centrifugal advancer that can be manually fixed in place you can get a pretty good idea of what's happening. As soon as inductive triggering (actually reluctive, but it's a small semantic point) came to the fore things got harder to deal with because there is no practical way to know when an ignition event occurs from static inspection. Add fuel injection engine management systems with multi dimension maps for ignition timing getting accurate results from static measurements becomes practically impossible.
There is a way to quite accurately determine when the ignition is firing at a given engine speed -- all you need is a multi channel oscilloscope tracking all the ECU timing and ignition pulses with an interface to a computer to make sense of it all, and a dyno to run the engine up to simulate real world use.
Add a turbo to the picture and the requirements get more complex in the form of four knock sensors to provide inputs necessary to know when detonation just begins to occur and automatically adjust timing to prevent engine destruction while trying to set it up. The factories do it this way, but in the case of hot rodding you get to incur all the expenses the factory avoided by not installing a turbo in the first place. Ideally the knock sensors should be left in place for an extra measure of engine management accuracy, but that requires a different ECU with the necessary inputs to handle it.
Let's be real here. If you want an occasional run up to the full boost region doing a "best guess" timing figure may be sufficient, but if you want a reliable engine that produces 60% more power that it did before and want to regularly use it in that region there is no substitute for getting it as close to optimum as possible. It may be expensive to do, but how much more expensive would it be to do multiple rebuilds while guessing at the settings and not really being sure of what's going on down there?
Unfortunately there is no real substitute to the right setup regardless of the expense involved ... except, of course, dialing the boost back to a more reasonable figure. Not gonna happen, is it?
The scope sounds like a good means of mapping the advance curve as well as being able to figure out the total lead.
Then one can use the Ignition Module to knock off some of the total advance where they want to.
But, how does one figure out the relationship of all this to TDC ?
The bikes electronics won't do that, they'll be doing everything in terms of the ignition trigger, correct ?
And I doubt the cam pulse generator would be that helpful either, correct ?
(speaking of which, if one put on adjustable cam sprockets and started playing with intake closing, that would effect the timing of the cam pulse, correct? I wonder how critical that even is, with a few degrees that is. Comments/ )
I'm still thinking that somehow someway a static check is needed as a starting point OR somehow get a degree wheel on with the engine running.
Perhaps a special mounting arrangement could be cooked up using the timing access cover on the right.
Gosh I love these explorations !