LOL!!!! This guy hasn't done anything major since the 1980's. And you call that 'current?'
How many others are in his club?
Many, including the recent addition of Nestles/Alland, that has put back hundreds of TR readings.
Check out the recent edition of the NASB vs an older one.
The TR is rated as equal in age to both Aleph and 'B' due to the recent findings of the papyri.
That Sturtz's work came out in the 80's shows how far behind you are in your textual understanding.
It is significant to note that the 1881 Westcott-Hort edition of the Greek New Testament actually reflects the closest approach to a “pure Alexandrian” text edition that has ever been created. The later editions of Nestle and others, including the identical text of the current Nestle-Aland 26th-27th editions and UBS 3rd-4th editions fail to preserve the “pure” Alexandrian character of the text in as sharp a manner as did Westcott and Hort, who relied primarily on the joint testimony of Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph) and Codex Vaticanus (B) in contradistinction to the assimilation of readings from manuscripts of other texttypes which is consistently practiced according to the eclectic principles espoused by the framers of the modern critical editions.
The current text found in the Nestle-Aland 26-27 and UBS 3-4 editions is actually an “eclectic” text, which reflects editorial choice among variant readings found in ALL known manuscripts and texttypes. Even though the current critical texts stand primarily in alignment with the Alexandrian manuscripts and in opposition to the Textform (Byzantine/Majority) found in most Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, the modern critical editions at best represent a “halfway house” between two opposing document-based schools of New Testament Greek textual criticism. They thus present a predominantly Alexandri an text “compromised” with numerous “Byzantine” readings (now shown to be ancient by many early papyri).
Most of the readings wherein the Nestle-Aland 26-27/UBS 3-4 text differs from that of Westcott-Hort actually reflect a turn toward selected Byzantine readings, primarily because these supposedly “late” readings (so deprecated by Westcott and Hort) are now proven to be early thanks to their discovery in various early papyrus documents
http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/biblia/gnt/index.htm