JD, I look forward to Sandy's repsonse, and in the meantime I'll just state that I think you do indeed need to 'overscan' significantly to get the highest res from a flatbed like a 4990 or 700. Even though the stated max res is not anywhere near what you actually get.
At some point I scanned the heck out of a piece of low speed film at several different resolutions and determined that there was decreasing improvement at progressively higher dpi, but that this improvement was there, and it was really only seen after downsizing the scan.
In other words, I allege that if you flatbed scan to the max and then downsize it to something more reasonable like 2400, you will obtain a better, cleaner result than by scanning straight to 2400. Obviously that is a pain because it involves long scan times and enormous files and then the downsizing.
I haven't thought about why that is so; perhaps it's merely an issue of averaging out the detector noise that is introduced by the scanner itself. Flatbeds use CCDs or similar, I assume, whereas drummers use PMTs.
This is not to say that 4800 or 9600 are true resolutions that you can obtain with a flatbed- they're apparently not anywhere close. Nevertheless, scanning at these resolutions and then downsizing should give some benefit- it's up to you to decide if it's worth it.
As far as a resolution target, I suppose that I could microprint something to allow us to do a flatbed res check. But surely some test samples exist already.