Averages from the same machine:

Generation 3: 22.34 cpu hours
Generation 4: 22.48 cpu hours
Generation 5: 22.12 cpu hours
Generation 6: 21.88 cpu hours
Generation 7: 22.04 cpu hours

From another cross-section:

Generation 1: 22.93
Generation 2: 22.55
Generation 3: 22.12
Generation 5: 22.36
Generation 6: 22.09
Generation 7: 22.30

Yes, all full tasks without server interruption due to soft or hard stops.

No, any new task has 100000 in them [that's what the scientists want **], except maybe the final of the 3 million series. It was even said, that 80K ** is the minimum that can pass muster, so anyone dreaming of sizedowns, may continue dreaming.

** read posts uplinger.

I don't have any work unit names on hand. My machine has completed work units from 10 up to just under 12 hours. All to 100,000 steps. Windows 10 I7 16 thread machine
One thing I cannot get my head around is. If the next generation of work unit is created because the first one only completed 80,000 steps there will be 20,000 steps to complete that work unit, however there is more steps added to the 20,000. My question is at what is the point in creating generations if you are always adding steps? Is it safe to say that every unit that doesn't complete the 100,000 steps it will create a new generation?
Apologies if this question has already been answered somewhere else.

Edit = 22.10 when I think of the new generation of a work unit being created I always think of the project Help Cure Muscular Dystrophy Phase 2.
This project is a work unit did not complete by a cut off point (can't remember the exact time think it was 12 hours) and new work unit would be created & then if that work units didn't complete the same thing would happen right through until they got grandchildren or even great-grandchildren work units