Does Ignore Cover USR prevent Jink saves?

Masters of the RAW, I present to you the following case: if you will flip through your handbooks to the USR section, you will find both the Jink and Ignore Cover USR. Note that the Ignore Cover USR relates only to potential WOUNDS, and says nothing of glances, penetrating hits or hull points. This seems to state quite clearly that Ignore Cover does not apply to hits against vehicles.
However, if you will turn to page 74-75, the third bullet under Vehicles and Cover, you will note that it states that a cover save is rolled exactly like a non-vehicle model would do against a wound.

RAI the USR is probably intended to deny all cover saves, regardless of target. But to muddy the waters even more the vanilla marine codex entry for the Thunderfire Cannon has a specific round type that has Ignore Cover...yet in the same codex, sternguard veterans have a specific round that ignore all cover saves. It does not have the USR but rather its own text, suggesting that their is a distinction between the two. Or perhaps this is just a writing error?

TL;DR What do you think, RAW lawyers? Is is cheese-mongery to allow vehicles to jink against Ignore Cover USR, or just a 6th edition change?

Jinks are cover saves.
Ignores cover ignores cover.

"Cover" is supposed to represent the chance to miss. Flamers dont miss.

Ignore cover does not ignore cover, you must have misread it It does not allow cover to be taken against WOUNDS inflicted by it, that is why I ask.

RAI it should ignore cover of all kinds, and yet...typical GW vagueness ensues.

The same way vehicles can't use invulnerable saves as invulnerable saves can only be taken against wounds (as per their description)? I guess flickerfields don't work...

@Mushkilla Don't get me wrong; I am on the same side as you. I am just looking for the specific ruling that allows it to affect vehicles, since vehicles clearly don't have wounds. Is the example I put evidence enough that Ignore Cover affects vehicles, or is there something else as well?

It's the same as the invulnerable shield on vehicles debate (revolving around vehicles not having wounds). GW rules writing at it's best. It's pretty hard to use GW rules without common sense as the gaming system just starts falling apart.

By raw there is nothing stopping you (other than common sense) from preventing ignore cover working on vehicles, the same way by raw your there is nothing stopping your opponent preventing invulnerable saves working on vehicles. But its one of those slippery slope situations.

I would say if ignore cover works on bike/jetbike jink saves why would it not work on vehicle jink saves. The same way that if invulnerable saves work on infantry/bikes/etc why wouldn't they work on vehicles. GW intent is clear but their execution is clunky.

Either way I'll add it to the FAQ request thread we have going.

+1 to mush. jink is a coversave and common sense (what you have to use with GW rule writing) is that the ignore cover USR would ignore jink saves