Looks like the idea of this redesign was to standardise the widths of 2/3rd of the elec. components supplied, thus simplifying by a factor of 3 the complexity and probably the 3 D space required for the operation of that stocking section component feeding lines, and making big savings that way. To clarify this point and make full sense of it, would be inclined to specify in [ ] the implied purpose of that elec. component width modification. Why? because the latter (elec. component width(s)) is only the means to the end sought (supply line width(s) and stocking system size reduction as a whole). Don't agree? :-)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2014-12-06 03:38:13 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

"Elec. component [feed line] width" could be an alternative

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2014-12-06 03:43:35 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

No. That's not working as intended!... We'd need to mention both, for this to make sense. So that would make this:
""Elec. component [+ feed line] widths"