While Scrivener was a TR advocate, he did not entertain illogical ideas about the primacy of the readings of the KJV English translation over against the Greek TR of Erasmus. The most valuable contribution of his KJV based Greek text for "autograph-aimed" textual criticism was in the footnotes.

Scrivener was well known as a defender of the TR; but he allegedly shifted toward the end of his life to a more moderate position. Here's a snippet from A History of Textual Criticism by Marvin Richardson Vincent:

With Dean Burgon he stood for the position that
all available authorities, and not the most ancient
only, should be considered in the settlement of the
text, and earnestly combated the tendency to rely too
exclusively on the testimony of [Aleph] and B. He was,
however, more moderate than Burgon, who pronounced Opinion of
[Aleph] and B to be the most corrupt of manuscripts. Codez °-
Scrivener says : " We accord to Codex B at least as
much weight as to any single document in existence ; "
and again, " We have no wish to dissemble the great
value of the Codex Vaticanus, which, in common with
our opponents, we regard as the most weighty single
authority that we possess." He also differed with
Burgon on 1 Tim. 3 : 16. In the last edition of the
Introduction his discussion of principles is summed
up in four practical rules : (1) That the true readings Critical
of the Greek New Testament cannot safely be derived
from any one set of authorities, whether manuscripts,
Versions, or Fathers, but ought to be the result of a
patient comparison and careful estimate of the evidence
supplied by them all. (2) That where there is
a real agreement between all documents containing the
Gospels up to the sixth century, and in the other parts
of the New Testament up to the ninth, the testimony
of later manuscripts and Versions, though not to be
rejected unheard, must be regarded with great suspicion,
and unless upheld by strong internal evidence,
can hardly be adopted. (3) That where the more
ancient documents are at variance with each other,
the later uncial and cursive copies, especially those of
approved merit, are of real importance as being the
surviving representatives of other codices, very probably
as early, perhaps even earlier, than any now
extant. (4) That in weighing conflicting evidence we
must assign the highest value, not to those readings
which are attested by the greatest number of wit-
nesses, but to those which come to us from several
remote and independent sources, and which bear the
least likeness to each other in respect to genius and
general character.

__________________
AV
Baptist
VA