A Lieberman writes:

I think my point was when there is an action, there should be a
reaction, and if I don't feel the reaction (which is faster then
registering on the instrument), then I need to explore further.

If you are on top of your instruments, no "exploration" is needed. The
reaction you feel may be leading you astray. It may seem uncorrelated to what
the instruments say. If it is possible for you to feel a sensation that does
not represent any change in the instruments (and it is), then logically it is
also possible for the instruments to change without you feeling anything. If
the instruments say that you've entered a turn, you've entered a turn, whether
you felt anything or not.

I am talking the very subtle changes, not changes requiring large
power changes.

Subtle changes are even more misleading.

For example, I come down the ILS at 90 knots with 1900 rpm. If
headwinds cause my groundspeed to drop below 90 knots and I add lets
say 25 RPM to recapture the glideslope and I DON"T feel it in my seat
of the pants, first place I will look is the temperature probe.
Again, talking subtle 25 RPM just finger tip touch to the controls.

Watch the instruments to begin with, not when you fail to feel something you
expect.

If I feel the extra oomph / firmness in my seat of the pants with the
extra 25 RPM and the glideslope starts to recapture, that is a
verification of my action and reaction.

If the tachometer rises by 25 RPM, that's a much more reliable indicator.

Again, very subtle changes I am look and feeling for. I am not saying
make turns by the seat of my pants, primarily verifying actions of
power settings.

You have way too much trust in your sensations.

In my Friday incident, I could tell my attitude indicator of 20 to 30
degree pitch up AND not feeling the extra G's in my rear end, that
something was discrepant having flown this plane for over 600 hours..
That had me going to my backup instruments IMMEDIATELY (VSI and
airspeed) for my analysis and quickly identifying the vacuum as
suspect..

Why weren't you checking the backup instruments to begin with? If they do not
disagree, chances are that all the instruments are working, no matter what
sensations you experience. If they disagree, at least one instrument probably
has a problem--again, no matter what sensations you experience.

If an instrument does not have a backup, you correlate it with other
instruments. They will behave in predictable ways in relation to each other.
If one of them does not seem to correlate with the others, perhaps it has a
problem.

It's not that I even remotely navigated by the seat of my pants, but
something was amiss was felt.

The danger in instrument flight is that all sorts of things are felt, but none
of them is reliable. It is called instrument flight because the pilot ignores
things felt and flies exclusively by the instruments.

I absolutely agree based on time and time again history, that any
feelings in the head absolutely has to be ignored, instruments are
there for that, but for verification of power adjustments, I see no
reason why AS A TOOL, the feeling in your rear end cannot be used as a
verification of the reaction of your actioin (adding or reducing
power).

The feeling in your rear end is no more reliable than the feeling from your
inner ear.

It sounds like your Friday incident has given you a false sense of security.