Oh dear! All my split attemps today have resulted in nothing! How do you do a split timing without spoiling lookahead???
TP is right, the splits should not interfere with look ahead. Cross, cross + 1 and full f2l should be done from a completely scrambled cube, you are just stopping at a given point in the solve and recording the time.
As regards full last layer, OLL and PLL, the best way is probably to get multiple cubes (say 5), do the ful f2l on each from a different scramble (recording split times for full f2l) and then place them U face down on the table, maybe even mix them round, find the lady style. When you then come to do your last layer times, just pick up a cube as you start the timer, then solve last layer, stop timer. Doing it in this way keeps the time taken for recognition and AUF as part of the overall time.
To do OLL and PLL singly, do the same thing (F2L complete, face down, mix round) then pick up and time OLL, replace cube U face down (PLL is incomplete). Do this for all 5 cubes and you have your OLL time. Then mix them around and do the same thing for PLL. This will include recognition and AUF also.
TP:- Your big problems are cross and PLL. For cross, try doing some work on solving the cross with your eyes closed after as much inspection as is required. Times of 4 seconds plus tell me that you are solving a couple of pieces, then finding the ones you missed then solving those on the fly, rather than having the whole thing planned out. If you cant plan all four and place them eyes closed, plan three and get good at that, so the only thing you need to do in addition is find the fourth piece and insert it. Then try to predict where that fourth piece will end up. Then its a short step to controlling where that piece ends up so its got good orientation and is easy to place, to eventually placing it as part of the planning. Executing eyes closed is essential though, as you dont want to maintain the crutch of needing to stare at the pieces.
You can then reduce your movecount by comparing your solutions to Jarcs or Prisma Timers cross solver. If you are say three or four moves higher than something more optimal, try and go through the optimal solution without physically moving the pieces, so that you can see the interaction mentally rather than passively witnessing the physical results. You should rapidly get to the point where you can plan all four pieces, execute the cross without looking, and use your eyes during cross execution to track your first corner edge pair.
If you are having difficulty executing the cross quickly once its planned out, then your issue is with non-standard move orders. By this I mean that 2-gen algs and well thought out OLLs/PLLs are learned since they are (relatively) easy for the fingers to accomplish. You may find that the cross solution you come up with is just not finger friendly at all, and you dont want this to hinder you (bear in mind a very fingertrickable cross solution that is one or two moves longer than a very unfriendly one is fine since you will execute it quicker. Try to use wide turns during cross, this will often eliminate extreme finger unfriendliness) . To train yourself to execute disconnected random moves, try timing how long it takes you to apply a scramble and improve that time. This will improve the ergonomic efficiency with which you handle the situations often being presented to you in cross, and you will find that it works wonders for training cross execution. Then your only barrier is how well you plan.
As regards PLL, you are right that using a 2-look alg set will seriously affect these numbers. If you are two-looking, then there is twice as much recognition and twice as much AUF time. If your PLL executions are 3 seconds, and you have to do two of these to get PLL done, thats six seconds already, add in a 1 second per alg for AUF and recognition and you end up with an 8 second PLL! I reckon that why your PLL recog and AUF is so high, its because you are essentially doing it twice.
On the flip side though, you are probably using two look OLL also, and your times for that are fine. I wonder if your PLL executions are a bit awkward? It is a common problem that people get much quicker times when just timing their PLLs in isolation than when they do them as part of a solve. There are a number of reasons for this:
1) Incorrect timing techniques
2) Taking the best rather than an average time
3) Not including time taken for regripping
4) Doing an alg once under pressure of a solve situation is very different to executing an alg for the 20th time in a row trying to get a good average execution time.
Examine the way in which you are executing these cases and compare your fingertricking with that of expert cubers. Faz, Cornelius, Chris Olson, Erik etc all have PLL execution videos out there. You dont have to copy them entirely, but perhaps they will show you ways in which you can reduce uneccessary cube rotations or regrips (probably regrips is your major issue).
And maybe its time you just learned full one look PLL? If its only the G perms, dont fear them, they are all related to one another and have a similar "feel" during execution. People seem to put learning these off, but really its not that bad. Headlights left, find the two by one block and start by splitting it up.
Learn them in pairs. Gb is the inverse of Ga, so you can apply Ga to a solved cube to end up with Gb (verifying you got it right), then solve Gb back to a solved state. Since each is the inverse of the other you will find they go together in your muscle memory, like Aa and Ab do. The other two are kind of the same moves but done to the opposite side of the cube (reflected in a line from UL to UR), so once you learn two, muscle memory helps with learning the others. You'll be amazed at how quickly you pick them up. Despite the rotation, they have nice flow.
Your F2L is taking a long time. Also work on that. Again, executing pairs with eyes closed is a great exercise. Spot the pair on the cube, close eyes, solve, open, repeat until all four done. This is an excellent way to internalise the relative movement of the pieces during F2L, and tremendously improves fluency. You are probably pausing multiple times during F2L, perhaps during the execution of an alg. If you can reduce the number of pauses your times will start to fall rapidly, and this exercise is a great way to start that.
Also consider metronome practice like I have discussed erlier in the thread. Start at 60 bpm and try to do one move per click. This helps you gain lookahead (further reducing pauses) and further internalises the movement of the pieces, since it forces you to go slow.
If you have any really long F2L cases (over 8 moves), find a better way from the wiki, and if you arent already, try to solve in other slots, further reducing cube rotations. Anything you can do in the right hand you should try to do in your left, which means you can insert into FL as well as FR, and some simple rear insertions (basic unmatched and matched pairs into BR and BL) will also save you a lot of rotations. Dont go trying to learn an alg for every case from every orientation at this stage, that would be counterproductive. Just try and expand your intuitive solving to include other slots than FR, make sure you are utilising empty slots where possible, and be conscious of how much you pause and rotate. Lay a solid foundation with metronome and eyes closed solving, and you will find that further improvement comes quickly, once you have gotten over this "brain active" phase. Its liek driving a car, at the moment you are going "check mirror, indicator, clutch, change gear, foot back to where it was, wheel turn, accelerator pedal.... etc" instead of just "turn left". Its the same with your pairs. Once you internalise the moves so its just "place that one, place that one, place that one" your only issue is finding them and movecount. Finding them = lookahead, which you will have started improvement on by metronome solving, and movecount is a check the wiki for difficult cases situation. May I offer a document in this respect which may assist? It can be found here:
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?6085-How-to-Get-Faster-using-the-Fridrich-CFOP-Method&p=824176&viewfull=1#post824176
Hope this helps, any more questions about what I have written, dont hesitate to ask
