[Driven5]

That's the problem with an off-the-shelf 1-piece design like the Ohlins. Oh, sure it has more total travel. However, it's inherently restricted to a manufacturer pre-selected range of ride height and spring rates. If you take it outside of that range, it becomes inherently compromised. If you want to properly run outside of that, it becomes a custom affair.

Meanwhile, yes the total travel is compromised on the 2-piece design, found on YCW/RedShift/etc. However, it can be combined for a wider range of ride heights and spring rates. The other drawback here is that if you don't know what you're doing, it's just as easy to get wrong as it is right.

I don't know what RedShift run standard, or what options they offer, but YCW have a 110mm travel shaft standard and can run 130mm travel shaft with the optional extended reservoir that extends down into lower mount cavity. However, as best I can tell, this is actually more valuable for a street setup than a track setup. Based on the Swift metric spring data, the 110mm setup can already meet or exceed the 'usable stroke' of the vast majority of spring we'd be discussing here. Even without going into coil bind, exceeding the engineered usable stroke of the springs can unnecessarily damage them. So going for 130mmm on those springs would merely allow you to do more potential damage to your springs more often. Thus to get the parts working together properly, there shouldn't be any need for longer stroke in a track application. If you're bottoming out with the 110mm, it simply means the springs and/or bars (depending when the bottoming is occurring) are not stiff enough.

That being said, it has crossed my mind (but I never had reason to ask) that for additional full-travel lowering on a track biased setup, they may also be able to combine the 110mm stroke shaft with a shorter body by using the extended reservoir.