The whole narrow width, or shorter than the "standard" - seems to be happening lots across many brands? SS Retro range? DSC bats?
I dont think its CA alone that may be missing a few mm?
Narrowing is a huge pet peeve of mine. Yes, lots of brands are doing it - that doesn't make it okay though. 108mm is the maximum width, but should be set as the industry standard. I've had some bats that I've sent back cause they're far too narrow (105mm I can just about accept) - I'm not paying adult sized prices for a harrow width bat. (104mm) In a market where volume - weight ratio is quite a big selling point, narrowing bats to fake low density (Without advertising it as such) is cheating. I've not even started on the narrowing of the back of the bats!
Just my view on this - Keeley, SS/TON, DSC, CA, SG, Chase, Aus/Indian market GNs are just a few of those who seem to be culprits in this regard. Some retailers can already have a headache of measuring edge and spine sizes to cater customer enquiries and listing bats - don't make them have to check the width of every bat up and down.
Also, with regards to the legitimacy of some CA labelled bats - I'll share something a little later. (I do quite like the look of the CA legend though, but echo Sitonit's sentiments about it.) Personally, I feel the quality of CA bats in general have gone down since the TRD 12000 days - back when the 8000 was a very respectable grade. I'm sure I sold
@Kulli a very nice 8000 here, but I may have confused him with someone else! Every CA bat I saw, bar none, was very well made and balanced. They were no less durable than bats today. (Could be rose tinted glasses, could be that clubmates all picked their's out in Pakistan)