I believe much of the created/uncreated grace issue is additional misunderstanding of theological terms and distinctions, combined with misapplication of them in controversialism.
As I understand it, created grace is scholastic term supposed to refer to effects within the human soul caused by its reception of uncreated grace. Thus, sanctifying grace is said to be created grace because it is the effect in the soul of its reception of the indwelling of the Blessed Trinity, not because the power of God (is this equivalent to the energies?), which causes the effects of grace, is a creature. I don't think one must take this to mean it is a creature that God can create and destroy, but rather that it is something created in our soul, meaning it occurs in time with respect to ourselves. God is not busy manufacturing quantities of grace for us.
It would probably be incredibly helpful if we could first come together and agree upon what we mean when we use various theological terms. This would probably clear up 3/4ths of our disputes.
Quite possibly much of the problem is largely terminological. The thing is, I think our traditionalists' critique of your soteriology under the heading of 'created grace' is broader than just objecting to the scholastic notion. As I pointed out, the reception of Barlaam of Calabria and his elevation to Cardinal left a very bad impression among the hesychasts.
The objection to purgatory (cf. St. Mark of Ephesus's Refutation) is considered under the same heading, since the Latin church, never having embraced the Palamite understanding of the Uncreated Energies, seems to teach purgation (a form of grace) by some created activity.