That's a day maker. I really appreciate it!
Now for timing, I've always liked to adjust timing for the RPM range where I'm going to be using the engine the most. Advancing the timing to anything before top dead center will put extra stress on the piston, pin, bearings, rod, big end bearings, crank, and crank bearings, but the reality is that 99% of all internal combustion engines run advanced timing and function perfectly well for very long periods of time. It will affect reliability, but this effect is so negligible with all but extreme cases that component failure will almost always be caused by another factor. A reduction in timing will always shift the emphasis to the lower RPM range whereas an increase in advance will do the same for higher revs.
Take ECU tuning for example.
The method we used when I was still involved was to set the timing across the board, 200rpm-redline and 14 other points in-between, as well as throttle openings for 0-100%, and boost levels at 16 ranges to zero. Once we made a pull, we'd adjust timing by 2-3 degrees and make another pull. Once power started dropping at any one range OR we saw detonation, we'd reduce timing to the previous setting for that block. 100% of my experience shows that the lower RPM ranges required less timing for optimum power and the higher RPM range required more. This varied by as much as -5 for startup (240rpm, typically) to over 30 advance at 8k.
Though it is unrelated, I think you and a few others will get a kick out of this.
We used to set the timing way back (sometimes delayed) for the tables that had 90% or higher throttle openings, under a certain RPM range, and less than 1psi of boost. This made the charge burn so late that it was still burning in the exhaust port and header, which would spool the turbo much quicker. In one instance, we used an ECU that had no launch settings and used an extra analog input that was routed to a clicker that was mounted to the clutch pedal. When the clutch pedal was depressed and the ECU saw load (throttle opening), the ECU would hold back timing by a huge amount to spool the turbo without having to rev the engine to the moon to do so. When the driver saw boost levels that he wanted to see, he'd drop the clutch which would release the switch, throwing the code off at the ECU, adding the timing back and making full power at full boost. AKA, boiling rear tires in most cases.
In the instances where the driver needed to continue to rev we'd held back the timing by just a small amount and add fuel to create the same late burning effect while still allowing the engine to rev and respond due to the timing. This was generally useful for situations where the driver was already moving and just stabbed the throttle. The key to this with street cars was to make this range where the driver could still get to 90mph while cruising (say 25% throttle) and not dump tons of fuel so that he could see decent gas mileage. As a result, we generally wouldn't hold back timing or add fuel unless the ECU read a load of 5% more than typical cruising throttle opening.
Of course, we'd do all that was necessary to make full power with 100% openings. If the owner wanted to make full power without race gas or ethanol, we would often run into a situation where we might have to add fuel to combat knock because the timing requirement for max power was so high. 11:1 AFR and 25deg timing might not make as much power as 10.5:1 AFRs and 27 degrees of advance. The glory of race gas is that we could run that 11:1 AND the 27 degrees of advance AND more boost.
Just a few thoughts.
As for static ignition, static fuel, N/A applications like a Blaster, getting the AFRs correct and then adjusting timing would be the optimum route. Also, a more efficient head will allow for less timing to make full power, which would result in even more power due to a decrease in pumping losses. If I was you, I'd go ahead and tell KOR that you wanted the head cut for whatever he charges. IIRC, he charges $60. Best $60 that you'll ever spend.