Here is how I see it:

1) Any other boost measurement system that is being used to compare to the JDM MAP sensor is going to be attached to the FPR vacuum/pressure hose. Many people have obtained excellent agreement between data taken from that location and data taken from the JDM MAP sensor. This suggests to me that there is no significant difference between the boost signal at the FPR hose and at the Mitsubishi MAP sensor location.

2) mixmastermatt's data is the only informative data showing a significant difference in boost measured at the FPR and at the JDM MAP sensor. His data shows that with his boost measurement system, the boost response measured at the FPR is appears to be significantly more sluggish than the response of the JDM MAP sensor. This sluggishness is suggestive of either a strong averaging (smoothing) filter applied to the data, or some sort of restriction in the line between the sensor and the manifold.

3) mixmastermatt's JDM MAP sensor data follows the load data almost perfectly. This suggests to me that there is indeed a boost spike that is causing a coincident increase in airflow into the motor, and the JDM MAP sensor is seeing that boost spike.

4) The most reasonable conclusion I can draw from these data is that mixmastermatt and you are seeing a much different boost response between the JDM MAP sensor and your other boost measurement system is because the device reading the boost from the boost sensor connected to the FPR hose has a significant smoothing filter built into it, or there is something about your boost hose configuration that is causing some damping of the transient boost response. The one bit of data that doesn't add up here is that razorlab is also using the Zeitronix system to measure boost at the FPR. I'm thinking that there may be a difference in the software settings between razorlab's setup and mixmastermatt's setup. I tried to download the Zeitronix software to see if some sort of smoothing filter option exists, but the software wasn't available. Perhaps someone with a Zeitronix system can chime in here.

5) You had asked before about whether there is a way to make the JDM MAP sensor data look like the data from your other boost measurement system. Based on mixmastermatt's data, I'd say that all you need to do is apply a significant averaging (smoothing) filter to the JDM MAP sensor data that you acquire. This can be done in Excel, or perhaps evo4mad will eventually incorporate a smoothing filter in EvoScan. Personally, I think the boost peak you are seeing is real, but if you don't want to see it, then a smoothing filter can hide it.