Not cutting you off though, we could keep going with testing etc if you like. But it does seem there's not much more to learn from testing and it's time to start thinking about which components the results of those tests could point to. Components/things those results could point to include the maf, fuel pressure sensor, lambda sensors (whether or not they're correct spec), fuel spec, false (unmetered) air leak between maf and throttle body. I probably forgot something!
But it's occurred to me there's one more thing I'd try before replacing any parts. At the rear of each fuel rail (near the firewall on the engine) there's a fuel injector harness connector... Disconnect one of those connectors and start it up, so it only runs on 4 cylinders because 4 cylinders have fuel injectors disconnected. Let it run until the engine warning light comes on (and probably flashes). Use your OBD tool to confirm that it's logged faults for at least one disconnected fuel injector. Then turn the engine off, reconnect the loom, turn ignition on, clear the engine error codes. Turn ignition off, restart the engine and immediately do some mixed style driving (like I advised before, don't just stick to a steady cruise or steady engine load). This doesn't seem intuitive I know, but there are good reasons for this advice. Back in the days when 4.2 SC RR's were relatively new, lots of people in my business (LPG converting vehicles) reckoned these vehicles had 2 fuel maps that the ECU's switched between, which they blamed for poor LPG conversion results. My take on it is that there's only one fuel map but there's a kind of underlying/initial adjustment/map and that adjustment/map is learned during early engine running from new and after and severe error codes are cleared with the idea being to have the 'usual' map have fuel Ltft's of around +7% when learned. But if that initial/base adjustment/map is learned wrong then even if all mechanicals and sensors are in good order and well within spec the Ltft's may be well outside of that average +7% when learned. You can't read that base/initial/underlying map on any scan tool but the concept isn't really that unusual, for example a lot of vehicles that run wide band probes kind of do much the same but in reverse, on those vehicles the fuel trims for idle are usually not anything like what would usually be expected (for an old skool vehicle with narrow band probes) until the fuel trims for under-load driving are learned, and then the base/underlying map for idle conditions is based on the under-load trims and the idle trims start to read as would normally be expected.
Not really relevant but I did have a look at the last couple of scan tool PDF's you posted, thing is in those data sets you'd selected S2 (post cat sensor) Stft's which are less relevant than S1 Stft's so the overall data sets were not as useful as the earlier data sets I based some of my advise on. Still they do confirm consistency with earlier data sets so they were useful in that respect.