Jim, these are quotes from the post you listed, your quotes: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_5002875/tm.htm

"Wing span has nothing to do with it. Wing area is the important factor. As wing area goes up, the airplane can support a higher wing loading. The 310 supposedly has a wing area of 948 sq. in. which would be about right for a 60 size trainer or a 90-120 size aerobat. Either of which would probably have a wing span of about 70 inches, putting them, and the Top Flight 310, squarely into your 25-30 oz category.
Jim"

I agree


"Great Planes seems to be moving toward great looking, unusual scale planes that are a real treat to look at, but "difficult" to fly. Personally, I wouldn't walk from the pits to the flight line for stick time on a twin with a 43-50 oz wing loading.
Jim "

I agree again


What is a good flier to one person may be terrible to another, I like my planes to be light on the wing and land at reasonable speeds.
I have a Yellow P-38, 80 inch span, 24 pounds, two Moki 2.1's, 37 oz/ft, beautiful airplane, makes ya drool to look at it, flies like crap.
It's hot. takes a lot of runway {wouldn't even consider flying off long grass}, and I know the first time an engine flames out will be the last time it flies.
After a 5 minute flight your sweating, NOT fun.
High wing loading means high pucker factor, I want to enjoy my time not work at it.
This is of course just my opinion