Low Volume Injection Moulding in India for Startups
- Feb 13
- 8 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
India’s startup ecosystem is rapidly expanding — especially among hardware entrepreneurs, consumer product founders, medical device companies, and IoT innovators. One of the most common manufacturing questions founders face is:
“Is injection moulding worth it for low quantities?”
While injection moulding is traditionally associated with mass production, low volume plastic injection moulding in India can be strategically viable for startups planning to scale.
The mistake many founders make is either investing in tooling too early — or waiting too long and losing margin to high per-part costs.The key lies in understanding tooling options, production economics, and long-term product strategy.
Table of Contents
Who Should Consider Low Volume Injection Moulding?
This guide is particularly relevant for early-stage companies and product founders evaluating small batch plastic manufacturing in India.
Hardware entrepreneurs developing physical products
Consumer electronics brands preparing for market launch
Medical device startups
Emerging direct-to-consumer brands entering competitive markets
Industrial product designers
International companies manufacturing in India
What Is Considered Low Volume in Injection Moulding in India?
In the Indian manufacturing context, low volume typically refers to:
50–500 parts → Very low volume
500–5,000 parts → Low volume
Unlike 3D printing, injection moulding requires tooling investment. Therefore, the viability depends on how tooling cost is distributed across production volume.
In many cases, startups exploring small batch manufacturing in India use this phase to validate demand before committing to long-term production tooling.
Prototype Injection Mould Cost in India: A decisive game changer for Startups
For early-stage companies requiring limited quantities, prototype injection moulds (proto moulds) provide a practical alternative to full production tooling.
What Is a Prototype Mould?
A prototype mould:
Is manufactured using softer materials
Has simplified tool design
Includes limited automation
Is built for a few thousand production cycles
Is usually an insert mould
Advantages for Startups
Lower upfront tooling cost
Faster development time
Suitable for pilot batches
Production-grade material properties
For many hardware entrepreneurs and emerging brands, prototype moulds allow validation without committing to high-capacity hardened tools.
Note : Unlike hardened tools used for full-scale production moulding, prototype moulds are designed for limited cycles and faster turnaround.
At Gan Tools and Components , we specialise in prototype and production tooling for startups transitioning from concept to scale.
Insert (Core–Cavity Only) Moulds: Reducing Tool Investment
Another effective strategy for low quantity plastic manufacturing is the use of core–cavity insert moulds.
How Insert Moulding Works
Instead of building a complete mould base:
Only the core and cavity inserts are manufactured.
These inserts are mounted into standard bolsters maintained in-house.
You pay only for the functional forming components.
Why This Reduces Cost
No need for a full custom mould base
Lower machining cost
Reduced material usage
Faster build time
For startups managing limited capital, insert moulding significantly reduces initial tooling expenses.
Note: Insert-only molding is restricted to simpler components. Parts with complex geometries that require modifications to the mould base are ineligible.
Understanding Injection Moulding Cost in India
Read our detailed guide on tooling investment, part pricing, and cost optimisation strategies for manufacturing in India.
Which Manufacturing Method Suits Your Startup Stage?
Startup Stage | Recommended Process |
Concept Stage | 3D Printing |
Functional Testing | CNC machining / 3D Printing/Prototype Injection Mould (if snaps are present) |
Pre-Launch Pilot | Prototype Injection Mould |
Post-Funding Scale | Production Injection Mould |
Selecting the correct process at each stage reduces total development cost and prevents premature tooling investment.
Economics of Scale in Injection Moulding
Injection moulding cost in India becomes increasingly economical as volume increases. Tooling cost remains largely fixed, while part cost remains relatively stable.
Example
Tool Cost: ₹4,00,000Part Manufacturing Cost: ₹40 per unit
Scenario 1: 500 Units
Tool cost per part: ₹800Part cost: ₹40Total per part: ₹840
At this volume, injection moulding rarely makes financial sense unless mechanical performance or finish quality is critical.
Scenario 2: 50,000 Units
Tool cost per part: ₹8Part cost: ₹40Total per part: ₹48
At mid-volume production, injection moulding becomes commercially viable.
Scenario 3: 5,00,000 Units
Tool cost per part: ₹0.8Part cost: ₹40Total per part: ₹40.8
At high volumes, tooling cost becomes negligible, making injection moulding extremely cost-effective.
Key Insight: The higher the volume, the lower the effective per-part cost.
Break-Even Analysis: When Does Injection Moulding Become Economical?
For product founders evaluating tooling cost for plastic parts in India, the most important question is:
At what production volume does the initial tooling investment become financially justified for a startup?
You can estimate this using a simple break-even formula:
Break-Even Volume = Tooling Cost ÷ (3D Printing Cost per Part − Moulded Part Cost per Part)
Example: Understanding the Break-Even Formula
Let us consider the following scenario:
Tooling Cost: ₹4,00,000
3D Printed Part Cost: ₹250 per unit
Injection Moulded Part Cost: ₹40 per unit
The difference between the 3D printed cost and the moulded cost represents the saving per part when choosing injection moulding instead of 3D printing.
In this case:
₹250 − ₹40 = ₹210 saved per part
This means that every time you manufacture one unit using injection moulding instead of 3D printing, you save ₹210.
The key question then becomes:
How many units must be produced for these savings to recover the initial tooling investment of ₹4,00,000?
This is calculated using the break-even formula:
Break-Even Volume = Tooling Cost ÷ Savings Per Part
Substituting the values:
Break-Even Volume = 4,00,000 ÷ 210
Break-Even Volume ≈ 1,905 parts
What This Means
After approximately 1,905 units, the total savings generated by injection moulding equal the ₹4,00,000 initial tooling investment.Beyond this point, every additional unit produced results in net cost savings compared to 3D printing.
Why This Is Important for Startups
If your projected demand exceeds 1,905 units, investing in injection moulding becomes financially advantageous. If your demand is significantly below this number, alternative manufacturing methods may be more appropriate in the short term.
Many founders delay tooling decisions out of fear of upfront investment, only to realise later that cumulative 3D printing costs exceeded mould cost within a few months.
Flexible Tooling Payment Structures for Startups
Cash flow is a critical concern for early-stage companies. To support this, multiple payment structures can be implemented.
1. Conventional Tooling Payment
40% advance
Balance payment after sample approval
This remains the standard industry approach.
2. Tool Cost Distributed Into Part Pricing
In this model:
Tooling cost is partially distributed across the part price.
A committed production volume is required within a certain agreed upon time span.
Terms are mutually agreed before manufacturing.
This reduces upfront burden while ensuring production continuity.
3. Partial Tool Investment Model
In selected cases where product scalability is evident:
We (Gan Tools) may partially invest in tooling.
Tool ownership becomes shared.
The tool remains operational only within our facility.
Remaining payments follow agreed structures.
This approach aligns long-term interests and supports promising products entering competitive markets.
When Small Batch Injection Moulding Makes Sense
Injection moulding becomes strategically justified for early-stage companies when:
1. Mechanical Strength Is Critical
Snap-fits, structural parts, and load-bearing components behave differently in moulded production compared to 3D printing.
2. Surface Finish Is Important
Consumer housings, enclosures, and visible components require consistent, production-grade finish.
3. Scaling Is Expected
If demand is likely to increase rapidly, early tooling investment prevents production delays.
4. Investors or OEM Clients Require Production-Grade Samples
Production-moulded parts demonstrate manufacturing readiness.
5. You Compete in a Price-Sensitive Market
For low-margin markets, 3D printing can severely impact profitability. Injection moulding ensures competitive cost per unit.
When Injection Moulding Is Not Recommended
Small volume plastic injection moulding may not be suitable if:
Your design is not finalized
You require fewer than 100 parts
You are only testing basic geometry
Product–market fit is not validated
Your product lifecycle is extremely short
In such cases, 3D printing or CNC machining may be more appropriate.
Injection Moulding vs 3D Printing for Startups
Factor | 3D Printing | CNC Machining | Injection Moulding |
Upfront Cost | Low | Medium to High | High (Tooling required) |
Per-Part Cost | High | Medium to High | Low (at scale) |
Surface Finish | Moderate | Excellent | Excellent (with proper tooling) |
Mechanical Strength | Limited (material dependent) | High | Production-grade |
Dimensional Accuracy | Moderate | Very High | High & Repeatable |
Scalability | Poor | Moderate | Excellent |
Best For | Prototypes, low volume | Functional prototypes, low–mid volume | Mid to high volume production |
For very small batches and early-stage small batch manufacturing, 3D printing works well. For structured scaling, injection moulding is superior.
All three processes are available at Gan Tools and Components, enabling a seamless transition from prototyping to full-scale production.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Can ultrasonic welding decrease the complexity of my injection moulding tool?
Yes. Complex geometries can often be split into simpler moulded components and later assembled using ultrasonic welding.
Advantages: | Trade-Off: |
|
|
For startups, this approach reduces upfront tooling investment while maintaining functional complexity.
Is Aluminium Mould Suitable for Startups?
In most cases, we do not recommend aluminium moulds for startups. While they are lighter in weight, they are significantly more prone to wear and damage compared to prototype tools. Additionally, the time advantage gained during fabrication is often not significant enough to justify the reduced durability.
Furthermore, aluminium is often more expensive than the materials used for high-quality prototype tooling, meaning startups end up paying a premium for a mould with a shorter lifespan.
For early-stage companies seeking reliable pilot production and long-term scalability, well-designed steel prototype moulds are generally a more practical, durable, and cost-effective choice.
Can prototype moulds be converted into production moulds?
In most cases, no. They are designed differently. However, design is used as a blueprint reducing production mould uncertainty.
What is the minimum quantity for injection moulding in India?
Most manufacturers consider 500–1,000 parts as the practical minimum for economic feasibility. However, prototype moulds can support smaller pilot batches.
How much does a prototype injection mould cost in India?
Prototype mould cost in India typically ranges from ₹50 k to ₹5 lakh depending on part size, complexity, and material selection.
Is injection moulding cheaper than 3D printing?
For very small quantities, 3D printing is cheaper due to no tooling cost. However, beyond a certain volume (usually 100+ units), injection moulding becomes significantly moreBreak-Even Volume ≈ 1,905 cost-effective per part.
How long does a prototype mould last?
Prototype moulds typically last between 1,000 and 10,000 cycles depending on material and part complexity.
Should you choose a hot runner system or a cold runner system for your mould?
For low-volume production, a cold runner system is usually the more practical and cost-effective option. It keeps tooling investment lower and reduces upfront risk.
A hot runner system generally becomes economical in high-volume production or when working with expensive engineering materials, where reducing material wastage significantly improves long-term ROI.
For a detailed comparison of performance, cost impact, and long-term economics, read our full guide:
Runner Systems Explained: Cold Runner vs Hot Runner in Injection Moulding
Final Thoughts: Is Low Volume Injection Moulding Worth It?
Low volume injection moulding is not simply about producing fewer parts — it is about building a scalable manufacturing foundation from the start.
If your projected demand crosses the break-even point, if mechanical strength and finish matter, and if you intend to compete on unit cost, tooling investment may be financially justified sooner than expected.
For early validation, 3D printing or CNC machining can be practical.For structured growth and long-term cost efficiency, injection moulding often becomes the more sustainable solution.
A clear, data-driven feasibility assessment today can prevent unnecessary expenditure — and position your product for scalable, cost-effective manufacturing tomorrow.
We are a manufacturing partner for startups and product companies all across India — including Bangalore, Mumbai, Pune, Delhi NCR, Hyderabad, and Chennai — as well as international founders manufacturing in India.
If you would like a break-even analysis for your specific part geometry and projected volume, our engineering team can provide a structured feasibility estimate.
Website : www.gantools.com
Email : development@gantools.com
RFQ : Google form for RFQ
Your ideas stay yours. By uploading your files, you are simply giving us permission to review them. We will not use your designs for any other purpose, nor will we share them with anyone outside our team without your written consent. You keep 100% of the ownership of your work.
Comments