I've seen Carl's video before (and numerous debates about its validity that can get "pretty heated" to say the least). I'm not physics professor but my own personal take (for what its worth) is that Carl is a phenomenal guitar player but he should stick to playing
As far as I understand it; tension is tension. The strings neither know nor care what angle the claw is set at or which claws they attach to. As long as the overall tension is equal to the string tension it shouldn't matter how you angle the claw. The strings exert their pull on the pivot points not the claw. Now it you mover one pivot point back relative to the other that would have an effect (probably not a good one though !)
I've come to the same conclusion over time, Alan, 'cause for the life of me I can't see how biasing the tension "behind" one pivot point or the other can make any difference. The fixed pivot points dictate that tension will always be the sum of the springs' individual contributions.
The upward-travel range of a trem is determined solely by the distance between its rear-bottom edge and the guitar's body.
IOW, I too don't "get it", all the fuss about claw angling. To me it's snake oil that's somehow persisted in being perceived as legitimate. If I'm wrong, I can only conclude that I (and you) must be missing something "obvious".