Compare Injection-Molding Suppliers on Lead Time, Tooling Capabilities & Service Range
Compare Injection-Molding Suppliers on Lead Time, Tooling Capabilities & Service Range
Choosing the right molding partner is a balancing act. Pick purely on price and you risk missed launches; focus only on speed and you may sacrifice CpK or cosmetic consistency. This guide lays out a practical scoring framework that weighs lead time, tooling capabilities, and service range—helping you select a supplier who will hit today’s deadlines and tomorrow’s volume ramps.
1 Why These Three Criteria Matter Most
| Criterion | What It Signals | Hidden Pay-Off |
|---|---|---|
| Lead Time | Tool-build speed, press availability, and ECO agility | Faster revenue recognition & smaller safety stock |
| Tooling Capabilities | In-house CNC/EDM, hot-runner expertise, conformal cooling | Lower scrap, longer mold life, tighter CpK |
| Service Range | Secondary ops, clean-room molding, metal stamping, automation | Fewer suppliers to manage, streamlined QA & logistics |
2 Fast Comparison Matrix — Fill It Out for Each Short-Listed Supplier
| KPI (Weight*) | Supplier A | Supplier B | Supplier C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prototype Tool Lead Time (20 %) | 3 wks | 5 wks | 4 wks |
| Production Tool Lead Time (15 %) | 6 wks | 8 wks | 7 wks |
| ECO Turnaround ≤ 72 h (10 %) | ✔ | ▲ | ✘ |
| In-House CNC & μ-EDM Count (10 %) | 18 machines | 8 | 5 |
| Hot-Runner / Valve-Gate Expertise (10 %) | Tier-1 | Tier-2 | None |
| Conformal-Cooling Capability (5 %) | ✔ | ✔ | ✘ |
| Clean-Room Molding (ISO 7/8) (10 %) | ✔ | ✘ | ✔ |
| Integrated Secondaries (10 %) | Paint, laser, stamping | Paint only | None |
| OTIF 12-Month Average (10 %) | 97 % | 92 % | 88 % |
| Weighted Score /100 | 88 | 74 | 59 |
*Adjust weights to fit your project’s risk profile; e.g., raise “Clean-Room Molding” for medical parts.
3 Lead-Time Benchmarks You Should Expect Today
| Deliverable | Competitive Target | World-Class Target |
|---|---|---|
| Aluminum Prototype Tool | ≤ 4 weeks | ≤ 3 weeks |
| P20 Single-Cavity Production Tool | 6–8 weeks | 4–6 weeks |
| ECO (Steel-Safe Cut) | ≤ 7 days | ≤ 72 h |
| First-Article Report | 7 days post T-1 | 48 h post T-1 |
Suppliers beating the world-class column typically combine in-house toolrooms, 24/6 machining, and laser-quick DFM loops.
4 Tooling-Capability Questions to Ask on the Plant Tour
-
How many high-speed CNC and wire-EDM machines are on site?
-
Do you run cavity-pressure sensors during T-1?
-
Can you show conformal-cooling case studies with cycle-time savings?
-
What preventive-maintenance schedule do you follow per mold type?
-
Which hot-runner brands do you service in-house?
If answers are vague or data isn’t readily shared, score the supplier lower in the matrix.
5 Service-Range Checklist
| Service | Must-Have for… | Red Flag if Missing |
|---|---|---|
| Clean-Room Molding | Medical, optics, wearables | Outsources to third party |
| Paint / IMD / Laser | Consumer electronics, appliances | No cosmetic traceability |
| Metal Stamping / Insert-Molding | Hybrid assemblies | Longer supply chain, higher QA overhead |
| Automation / Vision SPC | Volumes > 100 k pcs/yr | Manual inspection only |
A broad in-house service range means fewer freight legs, faster PPAP, and single-point accountability.
6 Example Outcome—Why Supplier A Won the Program
Supplier A scored highest on in-house tooling depth and ECO speed. Even with a 6 % higher part price, their faster lead time and lower scrap reduced total cost of ownership by 14 % and shaved three weeks off the launch timeline.
7 Apply the Framework via TaiwanMoldMaker.com
-
Side-by-Side Dashboards—lead time, CpK history, tooling assets, and certified services.
-
48-Hour DFM & Quote Packs—gate, cooling, steel, and cost comparisons in one PDF.
-
Bridge-Tool Credits—prototype aluminum cost rolled into multi-cavity H13 if demand surges.
-
Live SPC Portals—monitor OTIF, cavity pressure, and reject trends remotely.
