Well now Larry I am quite knowledgable of the fact that 70% patterns have been considered full choke performance for well over 100 yrs. Yet we say that shells have improved over the years. I read all the time about people claiming they have guns which using modern loads pattern 90%. It is quite obvious a shot which patterned 89% on a moving target at 35yds would have had a stationary pattern at 40 well in excess of 70%. It should also be well noted that to produce such a pattern not only requires an above 70% pattern, but also indicates a load producing a very high rate of central core thickening. For any use that I would desire to use a 28 I would find this more a - than a +, but then that's just me.
As to the wording, well I was a machinist, not a writer, I do believe though you well understood that I was simply using Bob's statement that they were both balanced relative to their bores. Bear in mind the word balance indicates a comparsion to Something. His own statement was that it was "Their Bores". I adequately explained why they were not.
"IF" I had the financial means Larry, I would equip the trailer, haul it to Iowa, buy a sufficient quanity of what ever brand of 3/4oz 28 ga loads you desired. I would then personally drive the tow truck while you did the shooting. I am quite positive we would very quickly establish that was not typical performance for the load.
The "ART" in this would be placing the shot effectively on the moving board. The Science would be the % of shot within the 30" circle. I do have the intelligence to distinguish meaning of the two words. If there is some factor of ART which applies to the ballistics of a shotgun please do inform me of it.
