I have a question, and it's in your last paragraph.. When you refer to how violent of a launch a radial can take, how are you gaging that? Trying to understand this.. The initial "hit" of the tire? The 60's they are capable of? I will agree with you that a radial does NOT recover well from a spin, however, as far as a violent launch, they can work just fine. I've seen too many sub 1.10 60's from a radial car.. But, the kicker here, and what a lot of people don't have access to is a properly preped track.. and another thing is the chassis is off as well.
I don't think you realize just how violent the launch of a low power car can be. As an example, let's assume a car has power for 1.50 60's, but has a grabby clutch that has a capacity of 800 ft/lbs before it begins to slip. When you launch that car, the clutch is going to draw 800 ft/lbs, and the engine does not have to make 800 ft/lbs to make this possible. That clutch will draw all the torque that the engine is making at wot, then it will draw the balance of the 800 ft/lbs from stored inertia energy which will cause the rotating assy to lose rpm. That extra inertia energy makes the launch much more violent, but remember as soon engine rpm is drawn down to the point that engine rpm sync's up with vehicle speed, rpm ceases to drop and that transfer of inertia energy stops. Problem is that after you have used that inertia energy and lost the rpm, that spent energy then has to be paid back in full before the engine can recover the rpm that it lost. That inertia energy transfer which initially made the car launch harder now slows the car, as it reverses and some of the engine's power must be used to recharge spent inertia energy back into the rotating assy. In the end, that temporary torque boost from inertia energy did not actually net you any performance gain.
Understanding that, now let's compare that 1.5 60' car with a grabby clutch, to a car that has power for 1.1 second 60's but does not lose rpm when it launches. If that 1.1 60' car does not lose rpm during launch, that indicates no inertia energy was used and it launched on engine power alone...
…2800 lb Car #1 has power for 1.5 second 60’s (1.66 G‘s), which requires a 60’ average of 4648 lbs of thrust at the tire
…2800 lb Car #2 has power for 1.1 second 60’s (3.08 G’s), which requires a 60’ average of 8624 lbs of thrust at the tire
The 1.5 60' car averages
4648 lbs of thrust over the initial 60', but remember that the clutch in Car #1 draws 800 ft/lbs of energy before it begins to slip. Multiply that 800 ft/lbs by it's 1st gear ratio (3.35 for example), rear gear ratio (perhaps 4.30), factor in some drive train loss (13% sounds good) and the 28” tire’s lever moment at the contact patch, that 1.5 second 60' car easily matches the 8600 lb thrust of the 1.1 60' car during that very short period of time before the clutch locks up!
That initial boost to 8600 lbs of thrust before the clutch locked up is then offset by a reduction of thrust below the average while the lost rpm is recovered. Even though thrust peaked at around 8600 lbs briefly, it's still just a 1.5 60' car. Add in violent pressure fluctuations at the contact patch from an unsorted chassis, it’s easy to see how a lower power car can easily upset a tire that's otherwise capable of amazing 1.1 second 60’s.
If that 800 ft/lb clutch in the 1.5 60' car were replaced with a 500 ft/lb version, the duration of clutch slip would be roughly 60% longer, which means the car would be traveling much faster at the point where rpm and vehicle speed finally sync up...much less bog. Now the tires only see a peak of around 5400 lbs of thrust instead of 8600 lbs in that brief period before the clutch locks up. Not only does the drivetrain see less abuse, but the engine does not lose as many rpm after launch and after the shifts...the engine will be pulling from a higher average rpm where it makes more power. It might be hard to believe, but even though the 500 ft/lb clutch slips longer and puts less stress on the drivetrain, the car will actually be quicker than it was with the 800 ft/lb clutch, and be much less likely to break the tires loose even with an un-sorted chassis.
These are not numbers from actual cars, just something i plugged in to help illustrate the concept.