Topic: GM Aion Signature width (Read 3579 times)

brokenbat · « **Reply #15 on:** March 29, 2024, 09:11:30 PM »

The whole world has gone a bit mad. There is no scenario in which a narrower bat is more beneficial than a full width bat.

People seem to think they gain more size by giving up width, but The true edge size of a narrower bat is actually 0mm (since there is no wood present at the 107-108mm point).
Pros should be demanding full width bats and be willing to accept smaller edges. The whole �I middle the ball� argument is not rational- there is a reason a technique bat is harder to use, despite having �bigger� edges.

I think Steve smith and labuschagne might be the only pros checking width these days (Marcus carries vernier calipers in his bag).

Re GM - I think this is a massive mistake from them. They were supposed to be one of the few bat manufacturers who didn�t subject the consumer to these gimmicks. I applaud B3 for being so transparent about their latest profile being narrower- everyone should follow their example.

Be transparent and then let the consumer decide what they want.

jonny77 · « **Reply #16 on:** March 29, 2024, 09:17:11 PM »

Quote from: Jimbo on March 29, 2024, 08:00:24 PM

I can understand it from your top pros, they middle the ball so often and (especially in T20) a nick off the edge isn't necessarily a bad result.

I'm sure it's been raised before but how much weight are you saving with a couple mm thickness of the blade?

Did this a while ago. Pics below show weight of the bat at 109mm and then weight at 108mm (roughly). 0.5oz lost.

Chad · « **Reply #17 on:** March 29, 2024, 10:21:59 PM »

Quote from: brokenbat on March 29, 2024, 09:11:30 PM

The whole world has gone a bit mad. There is no scenario in which a narrower bat is more beneficial than a full width bat.

People seem to think they gain more size by giving up width, but The true edge size of a narrower bat is actually 0mm (since there is no wood present at the 107-108mm point).
Pros should be demanding full width bats and be willing to accept smaller edges. The whole �I middle the ball� argument is not rational- there is a reason a technique bat is harder to use, despite having �bigger� edges.

I think Steve smith and labuschagne might be the only pros checking width these days (Marcus carries vernier calipers in his bag).

Re GM - I think this is a massive mistake from them. They were supposed to be one of the few bat manufacturers who didn�t subject the consumer to these gimmicks. I applaud B3 for being so transparent about their latest profile being narrower- everyone should follow their example.

Be transparent and then let the consumer decide what they want.

Pros can use what they want - some genuinely don't care as much about these dimensions that we more neurotic bat buyers do. Knowing how good some of the bats in your collection are - you should give your bats up to pros! 😂

With your logic - the bat having an edge size of 0mm should mean you may end up saved by the smallest of margins with a narrower bat at times. And you may as well have a bat that's 106mm with 10mm of wood at the edge is equal to one that's 106mm width with 38mm edges. I can tell you what the vast majority of the market will want assuming they're the same weight.

There's a lot more to kick up a furore about than the narrowing of bats in the cricketing world IMO. I do agree about folks being transparent about it at least though - must stress that. Transparency about the willow, the manufacturing continent and general dimensions like length configuration and width

Thamesvalley · « **Reply #18 on:** March 29, 2024, 10:31:12 PM »

Quote from: brokenbat on March 29, 2024, 09:11:30 PM

The whole world has gone a bit mad. There is no scenario in which a narrower bat is more beneficial than a full width bat.

People seem to think they gain more size by giving up width, but The true edge size of a narrower bat is actually 0mm (since there is no wood present at the 107-108mm point).
Pros should be demanding full width bats and be willing to accept smaller edges. The whole �I middle the ball� argument is not rational- there is a reason a technique bat is harder to use, despite having �bigger� edges.

I think Steve smith and labuschagne might be the only pros checking width these days (Marcus carries vernier calipers in his bag).

Re GM - I think this is a massive mistake from them. They were supposed to be one of the few bat manufacturers who didn�t subject the consumer to these gimmicks. I applaud B3 for being so transparent about their latest profile being narrower- everyone should follow their example.

Be transparent and then let the consumer decide what they want.

Agree

mr_reagan · « **Reply #19 on:** March 30, 2024, 01:34:32 AM »

Quote from: Chad on March 29, 2024, 10:21:59 PM

Pros can use what they want - some genuinely don't care as much about these dimensions that we more neurotic bat buyers do. Knowing how good some of the bats in your collection are - you should give your bats up to pros! 😂

With your logic - the bat having an edge size of 0mm should mean you may end up saved by the smallest of margins with a narrower bat at times. And you may as well have a bat that's 106mm with 10mm of wood at the edge is equal to one that's 106mm width with 38mm edges. I can tell you what the vast majority of the market will want assuming they're the same weight.

There's a lot more to kick up a furore about than the narrowing of bats in the cricketing world IMO. I do agree about folks being transparent about it at least though - must stress that. Transparency about the willow, the manufacturing continent and general dimensions like length configuration and width

I think it can both save you in that you will miss the ball and cost you when you get small edge that goes straight to first slip instead of a thick outside edge that flies through gully. Chances are you wont know either of those things has happened to you because of your bat being narrower.

In the end its all about transparency and companies being up front and honest with you as they take your hard earned money.

Thamesvalley · « **Reply #20 on:** March 30, 2024, 04:10:20 AM »

The pros who are unaware they are using a smaller worth bat at the highest level

If they were told would they continue or would they ask for them to be widened �

Have heard several stories of some being unaware and then asking for them to be wider

In terms Babar only the hesd Gn maker will currently know if he�s asking for less width bats for tests and odi and t20 ?

Jimbo · « **Reply #21 on:** March 30, 2024, 10:20:37 AM »

Quote from: Thamesvalley on March 30, 2024, 04:10:20 AM

The pros who are unaware they are using a smaller worth bat at the highest level

If they were told would they continue or would they ask for them to be widened �

Have heard several stories of some being unaware and then asking for them to be wider

In terms Babar only the hesd Gn maker will currently know if he�s asking for less width bats for tests and odi and t20 ?

Believe Alex addressed this in a thread a while ago, Babar had skinnier bats and wasn't aware but his bat specs would need a miracle bit of willow to achieve at his desired weight and a full width.

KW9221 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 30, 2024, 11:07:10 AM »

Personally, I would take 36-37 mm edges bat any day over narrow blade. Being an opener, full size blade would be more important to me than bigger edges.

Six Sixes Cricket · « **Reply #23 on:** March 30, 2024, 11:12:53 AM »

Just checked my bats, lower end around 105-106mm, higher end bats 107mm.

Just remember the bats are finished by hand, so there will be a varieance after the cleft is cnc'd.

There is no way GM are trying to mislead anyone, its only you lot on here that worry about such things

jonny77 · « **Reply #24 on:** March 30, 2024, 01:32:18 PM »

@Six Sixes Cricket is right, not many people outside of this forum would know the allowed max width of a cricket bat, let alone really care.

I've said it before and some on here wouldn't want to hear it, but we're all responsible for this in some way. It's always (90-95% of the time at least) about 'specs' and something has to give.

@KW9221 states abv that he'd take a 36mm/37mm edge at full width over big edges and narrower. This is the issue here. 37mm edges aren't considered big anymore???!! Good luck being a batmaker and making consistently full bars with 38mm edges, high spines etc at lighter weights.

Until smaller edges are accepted and we all stop talking like bats have to be fill the gauge, then this sort of thing is what batmakers will do to sell bats I'm afraid.

Thamesvalley · « **Reply #25 on:** March 30, 2024, 02:00:28 PM »

38edge or 37 is pretty decent

I can�t remember specs of aions but are they not meant or be 37mm edges

Yorkershire · « **Reply #26 on:** March 30, 2024, 02:38:10 PM »

Quote from: Six Sixes Cricket on March 30, 2024, 11:12:53 AM

Just checked my bats, lower end around 105-106mm, higher end bats 107mm.

Just remember the bats are finished by hand, so there will be a varieance after the cleft is cnc'd.

There is no way GM are trying to mislead anyone, its only you lot on here that worry about such things

We do but a whole 4 mm which is academy size on a new SH bat. I feel I'm well within my rights to be unhappy and return it. If others are happy with this, then that's their choice and I have no issue with their choices.

jonny77 · « **Reply #27 on:** March 30, 2024, 02:47:23 PM »

You are mate, well within your rights. I think 106mm or below and people should state it, but everyone will think different.

@Thamesvalley thanks for proving my point! 😆 38mm is just 'pretty decent'. Jeez!

Thamesvalley · « **Reply #28 on:** March 30, 2024, 02:48:21 PM »

Pretty decent is another words words fine �

Thamesvalley · « **Reply #29 on:** March 30, 2024, 02:48:47 PM »

I use a bat with 34mm edges and it�s a gun but seems to be one of a kind

Author Topic: GM Aion Signature width (Read 3579 times)

brokenbat

Re: GM Aion Signature width

jonny77

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Chad

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Thamesvalley

Re: GM Aion Signature width

mr_reagan

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Thamesvalley

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Jimbo

Re: GM Aion Signature width

KW9221

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Six Sixes Cricket

Re: GM Aion Signature width

jonny77

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Thamesvalley

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Yorkershire

Re: GM Aion Signature width

jonny77

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Thamesvalley

Re: GM Aion Signature width

Thamesvalley

Re: GM Aion Signature width