1.42ata wasn't cleared until around December 1943 (or was it October?).
I already gave you date with a source where it is from in my post, 8th of June '43. You obviously just decided to ignore it and throw another date in without any source.
Further, regardless of what our cockpit says for our G-6, it's over 10mph too slow to be using 1.42ata. It should hit about 406mph clean at FTH.
There's absolutely no single simple answer on the speed, none. There are different data sets showing different results even when they were ran at similar power settings. G-6 in AH does 337mph (542kph) on the deck. I haven't seen those kind of speeds with 1.3 ata
anywhere. AH is very fast on the deck when comparing to the most of the data sets published, and very slow at best altitude.
I'm not implying that all of them had MW50,
Well that is exactly what you implied right here:
Our previous 109G-6 was set up more as a later-war mixup, with a 30mm option but without the later-war engine power. So it was a bit of a Frankenstein. It also wasn't very useful in scenarios and setups and planesets that needed the early variant of a G-6. The 30mm threw it all out of balance.
Considering that AH G-6 is already running at 1.42 ata, the only "late-war engine more" (as you put it) improvement would be with MW-50 (and larger supercharger on the /AS models but those aren't under discussion here). So that is baiscally the only improvement in out put you could be talking about to begin with.
Guess what?
That's what our G-14 does.
Ask the same person about an early G-6 from 1943 (my previous 1942 must be a typo) and they'd say it would be slower, have only 20mm, and would have a few different external features.
Just like our in-game G-6.
Blah blah blah. Is this just your illogical babbling or have you ran a poll?

You suggest back-handedly that he alone was responsible for its removal,
Oh please.
Quote me on it, quote me on how I "back-handedly" suggested something. I simply mentioned that Wotan had suggested on MK108's removal and Pyro most likely took it away based on his opinion since Wotan was the only one to suggest the cannon's removal. I wasn't attacking Wotan in anyway, I was simply mentioned it as the most likely cause.
when in fact all he did was illustrate a very well typed list of facts explaining how few of these Mk108s were in existence.
Yep, oh so few. Based on the production numbers I've seen on various sources the total G-6/U4 production was around 1650 aircraft.

I didn't feel the need to quote citations (an excuse you hide behind, to throw in peoples' faces) because you were well aware of the details and had read the nicely-typed-up facts from Wotan himself. I'm sure he has posted the info in several places. Doing a search this is the first one that came up:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,309008.msg3996405.html#msg3996405
He cites Hopp and Prien. I only type that so you can't pretend to throw it back in my face. Because you assume too much. You know the old saying about when you assume? You make an bellybutton out of yourself and... Me? Well, I just laugh at you for it.
WTF?

In this kind of discussion when you quote numbers like that it's pretty clear that sources should be given. As said, the production numbers during 1943 hardly matter. The cannon can be removed by the CMs. You are arguing for the sake of arguing.
As for your totally biased and loaded words, "banned loadouts" etc... that's hogwash. It WASN'T common, and it WASN'T used, at least not on our G-6. That's the point. You're trying to blur the lines and down-playing the differences just to make an argument for a weapon you want.
Oh go cry a river.
I haven't flown G-6 a lot for years. When I flew it I practically always used the 20mm, same goes for the G-14. It is a matter of principle.
As for other planes in this game with rare loadouts, you also ASSUME (again) that I'm trying to argue for them somehow. I'm not. You bring that into the equation for no reason. You are quite aware of HTCs slow timeline for adding or removing or changing anything with their planes. You know first-hand as well as I do that you will never get a sweeping change, and that it must come piece by piece. This is one of those pieces. It's a step towards better modelling for individual variants. You can't bring up the 3-gun La7 as a justified excuse to add a Mk108 on the G-6 we currently have.
I don't assume anything. It is a matter of consistency. Pyro himself recently said that now that CMs can remove load outs that are not desirable for events, rarer loads can be included:
Originally I tried to keep things fairly tight on loadouts because that could have a big effect on special events. The CM's couldn't restrict loadouts in events back then. They can now so it's not as big of an issue. I'm not sure what's meant by the axis being held to a tougher standard.
Won't get much more clearer than that.