micro molding services is provided by F&Q TECH, a responsible manufacturer. It is made through a process that involves rigorous quality testing, such as inspection of raw materials and all finished products. Its quality is strictly controlled all the way, from the design and development stage in accordance with standards.
What sets F&Q TECH apart from other brands in the market is its dedication to details. In the production, the product receives positive comments from overseas customers for its competitive price and long-term service life. These comments help shape the image of the company, attracting more potential customers to buy our products. Thus, the products become irreplaceable in the market.
It is universally known to all that sound service solutions are essential for doing business successfully. Highly aware of that, we offer a sound service plan for micro molding services at F&Q TECH including a favorable MOQ.
In the development of plastic products, choosing between 3D printing and injection molding requires comprehensive consideration of factors such as cost, precision, batch size, and design complexity. The following is an analysis of the two processes from the two core dimensions of cost optimization and high-precision requirements, combined with the characteristics of the two processes, and provides a basis for decision-making.
1) Production batches determine the core cost structure
3D printing: suitable for small batches (usually <1000 pieces) or single-piece production. It does not require mold costs, has low material loss (only the support structure may waste a small amount of material), and is flexible in iteration. For example, when using FDM technology to print a prototype, the cost per piece may be only 1/10 of that of injection molding.
Injection molding: more cost-effective in large-scale (>1000 pieces) production. Although the mold development cost is high (thousands to tens of thousands of yuan), the cost per piece decreases significantly as the batch increases. For example, in one case, the injection mold cost $10,000, but the cost per piece was only $0.1 when producing 100,000 pieces.
2)Design and iteration cost comparison
3D printing: CAD models can be directly printed after modification, without additional costs, suitable for the prototype stage where the design is frequently adjusted. For example, a company shortened the R&D cycle from 4 weeks to 48 hours by using 3D printing molds.
Injection molding: Mold modification costs are high (especially metal molds), suitable for mass production after the design is finalized. If the mold structure needs to be adjusted, it may be necessary to re-open the mold, which will increase the cost by tens of thousands of yuan.
3)Material And Post-Processing Costs
3D printing: limited material types (such as PLA, nylon, resin, etc.), some high-performance materials (such as PEEK) are expensive; post-processing usually only requires grinding or sandblasting.
Injection molding: wide selection of materials (such as ABS, PP, PC, etc.), lower prices; but post-processing such as mold polishing and electroplating may increase costs.
Decision suggestions:
Small batch/prototype: choose 3D printing (FDM, SLA or SLS);
Large batch/finalized product: choose injection molding.
1) Process accuracy comparison
3D printing:
SLA/DLP: accuracy of ±0.01 mm, smooth surface, suitable for precision medical or electronic parts.
SLS/MJF: accuracy of ±0.1 mm, suitable for complex structures but slightly rough surface.
FDM: lower accuracy (±0.2 mm), obvious layer pattern, need post-processing.
Injection molding:
accuracy is usually ±0.05 mm, high surface finish (Ra 0.8~1.6 μm), no additional processing required.
2)Material strength and stability
3D printing: weak interlayer bonding, which may affect mechanical properties; easy to deform at high temperatures (such as PLA softening point is 55°C).
Injection molding: The material is dense, high in strength and isotropic, and has better temperature resistance (such as ABS can withstand 80~100°C).
3) Complex structure adaptability
3D printing: It can manufacture complex structures that are difficult to achieve with traditional processes, such as hollowing and conformal water channels. For example, the curved cooling channel in the mold can improve the injection efficiency.
Injection molding: Due to the mold demolding requirements, the design must avoid internal right angles or too deep cavities, otherwise it will increase the difficulty of processing.
Decision suggestions:
High precision + complex design: choose SLA or metal 3D printing (such as SLM), but you need to accept higher costs;
High precision + large batch: injection molding combined with CNC precision mold to ensure dimensional stability.
Clear requirements: batch, budget, design complexity, precision level, material performance.
Cost accounting: compare mold costs, single-piece material costs and post-processing costs.
Technology matching:
If fast iteration or small batches are required, 3D printing is preferred;
If high strength or surface finish is required, injection molding is preferred.
Hybrid solution: For example, use 3D printing to make prototypes or conformal water channel molds, and then mass produce them through injection molding.
1) Pepsi bottle mold: By combining 3D printed inserts with traditional metal molds, the cost is reduced by 96%, and the production cycle is shortened from 4 weeks to 48 hours.
2) Medical implants: Use SLA to print high-precision prototypes, and then switch to injection molding for mass production after verification.
3) Shoe mold manufacturing: 3D printing can achieve complex patterns, replacing traditional CNC, and increasing efficiency by 50%.
Between low cost and high precision, a balance needs to be made according to specific scenarios:
3D printing: the first choice for small batches, complex designs, and rapid iterations;
Injection molding: an economical solution for large batches, high precision, and high-strength scenarios.
In the future, hybrid manufacturing (such as 3D printing molds + injection molding mass production) may become the mainstream direction for balancing cost and performance.
In the field of plastic injection molding, the "tonnage" of an injection molding machine directly determines its capacity limit. Tonnage does not refer to the weight of the entire machine, but the size of its clamping force, measured in tons (T). This parameter represents the maximum closing force that the clamping system of the injection molding machine can exert, which is used to resist the huge expansion pressure generated when the molten plastic is injected into the mold. If the clamping force is insufficient, the mold will be stretched open, resulting in flash burrs; and excessive tonnage will cause energy waste and equipment loss.
The calculation of clamping force follows the core formula:
Clamping force (T) = product projection area (cm²) × mold pressure (kg/cm²) × safety factor / 1000
The mold pressure depends on the material properties:
Ordinary plastics (such as PP, PE): 250-350 kg/cm²
Engineering plastics (such as PC, nylon): 350-500 kg/cm²
The safety factor is usually 1.1-1.2.
Injection molding machines can be divided into four categories according to tonnage, which have significant differences in mechanical structure, application scenarios and technical requirements:
(1)Small machine (30-100 tons)
Structural features: mostly vertical or angular design, mainly fully electric drive, small footprint
Injection volume: usually ≤200 grams (based on PE)
Typical applications:
Electronic connectors (USB interface, SIM card tray)
Precision gears (clocks, micro motor parts)
Medical equipment (syringe needles, test tubes)
Advantages: high precision (repeat error ±0.01mm), energy saving (60% less power than hydraulic presses), no oil pollution
(2)Medium-sized machine (150-500 tons)
Mainstream machine: hydraulic or hydraulic-electric hybrid drive, horizontal structure
Injection volume: 300-2000 grams
Application scenarios:
Household appliance housing (rice cooker, vacuum cleaner housing)
Daily necessities (washbasin, chair, toy)
Automotive interior parts (dashboard frame, door handle)
Technical highlights: Can be equipped with multi-color injection molding system (such as P-type/L-type double shot) to achieve dual-material composite molding
(3)Large machine (600-1000 tons)
Structural features: two-plate clamping mechanism, enhanced rigidity and mold opening space
Injection volume: 2500-5000 grams
Typical products:
Logistics pallet (1200×800mm standard size)
Automobile bumper
Large trash can
Challenge: Need to cooperate with mold temperature control system to prevent shrinkage of thick-walled parts
(4)Ultra-large machine (>1000 tons)
Representative models: Haitian 1600T, Fuqiangxin 1900T three-color machine
Capacity indicators: up to 4000 tons, injection volume exceeds 20kg
Application areas:
Automobile instrument panel (one-piece molding)
Yacht deck parts
Large turnover box (volume>1000L)
Innovative design: horizontal two-color machine (H type) with overlapping mold technology, production capacity increased by 70%
Table: Comparison of injection molding machine tonnage and key parameters
Tonnage range
Clamping force (T)
Injection volume (g)
Screw diameter(mm)
Typical mold structure
Minicomputer
30-100
≤200
25-40
Toggle
Medium-sized machine
150-500
300-2000
45-70
Toggle/Two-Plank
Mainframe
600-1000
2500-5000
75-110
Two-plate
Large Scale Machines
>1000
>5000
≥120
Two-plate enhanced
The cost of failed selection
Insufficient tonnage: product flash and size deviation (a mold that is stretched 0.1mm can lead to scrapping)
Tonnage is too large: energy consumption increases by 30%-50%, the risk of mold deformation increases, and mold exhaust difficulties lead to burning
Four-step scientific selection method
Calculate clamping force
Take the car bumper as an example: the projected area is 1200×600mm=7200cm², and the pressure in the PC mold is 400kg/cm²
Theoretical clamping force = 7200×400×1.2/1000≈3456T → Select the 3500T model
Test tolerance
Mold size ≤ tie rod spacing (such as the tie rod spacing of the 1000T machine is usually 1200×1200mm)
Mold thickness ∈ [minimum mold thickness, maximum mold thickness] (for example: the mold thickness range of 350T machine is 150-450mm)
Ensure demoulding space
Mold opening stroke needs to be > product height×2 + runner length (deep cavity parts need to add an additional 20% margin)
Match injection system
Finished product weight should be ≤ Theoretical shot volume × 75% (leave a safety margin)
For thin-walled parts, choose a small screw (high pressure and high speed), and for thick-walled parts, choose a large screw (high plasticizing capacity)
Industry scenario application
Electronic industry (below 100T): Connectors use a 30mm diameter screw, and the shot speed ≥300mm/s ensures filling
Home appliance industry (300-800T): Air-conditioning panels use hot runner molds + 650T machines to reduce runner waste
Automotive industry (>1000T): Door panels use a double-station turntable three-color machine to achieve one-time molding of substrate + soft glue + logo
Medical industry (50T fully electric): Syringe production is equipped with a Class 100 clean room to avoid hydraulic oil pollution
The selection of injection molding machine tonnage is undergoing three major technological changes:
Energy-saving drive
All-electric injection molding machines (such as FANUC Roboshot) replace hydraulic presses below 100T, reducing energy consumption by 60%; the penetration rate of hybrid technology in large machines increases (such as Haitian MA series)
Intelligent control system
IoT module monitors clamping parallelism in real time (deviation of >1000T machine needs to be ≤0.1mm/m)
AI algorithm dynamically optimizes the pressure holding curve, reducing the molding cycle of large-tonnage machines by 15%
Specialized development
Micro injection molding machine (<10T): used for medical microfluidic chips, injection accuracy ±0.002g
Multi-component large machine: such as Fuqiangxin FB-1900R three-color machine, turntable diameter 2250mm, serving the integrated molding of automobile lampshades
In the future, with the application of new materials (such as carbon fiber reinforced plastics), the clamping accuracy requirements for high-tonnage machines will be further improved, and modular design will make tonnage adjustment more flexible-by replacing the screw assembly, the same clamping unit can cover the injection range of ±30%.
The selection of injection molding machine tonnage is like deploying troops for a battle: too little will not be enough, and too much will be a waste of money and effort. From a connector the size of a fingernail to a car bumper several meters long, the difference in tonnage is the result of the deep collaboration of material science, mechanical design, and control algorithms. In the future, with the advancement of energy-saving technology and intelligence, tonnage selection will no longer be based solely on empirical formulas, but will be dynamically optimized based on real-time data, pushing plastic molding into a new era of "tailor-made".
3D Printing vs. Injection Molding: Coexistence in the Age of Digital Manufacturing
Why Neither Technology Will "Win"—And Why That’s Good for Industry
Injection Molding remains the backbone of mass production:
Scale & Speed: Produces 10,000–1M+ identical parts at <30-second cycles (e.g., automotive trim, consumer packaging) .
Material Edge: Supports 30,000+ engineered polymers (e.g., PEEK, COC/COP) with ISO-certified mechanical properties crucial for medical/auto sectors.
Cost Structure: High initial tooling ($50k–$500k for steel molds) but pennies per part at scale.
3D Printing (Additive Manufacturing) excels in digital agility:
Zero Tooling: Direct digital-to-part production enables overnight prototyping and design iterations.
Complexity for Free: Generates hollow structures, organic lattices, and integrated assemblies impossible for molds (e.g., GE’s fuel nozzles with 20 parts consolidated into one) .
Localized Production: "Print farms" like China’s Jinqi (4,000 printers) deliver 50k+ custom toys/day to global markets, bypassing shipping/logistics .
Table: Technical & Economic Comparison
Criterion
Injection Molding
3D Printing
Optimal Batch Size
10k–1M+ units
1–10k units
Lead Time
8–16 weeks (tooling)
Hours to days
Material Range
30k+ polymers
300–500 certified materials
Part Cost at Scale
<$0.50 (e.g., bottle caps)
<$0.50 (e.g., bottle caps)
Design Constraints
Draft angles, parting lines
None
Aerospace: 55% of Boeing/Airbus suppliers now use metal AM (titanium brackets, turbine blades) to cut weight by 30–60% .
Medical: 67% of orthopedic implants (e.g., Stryker’s Tritanium) are 3D-printed for bone ingrowth optimization .
Automotive: BMW’s iFactory uses 3D-printed jigs (50% lighter) and end-use parts (e.g., Rolls-Royce bespoke components) .
Consumer Goods: Adidas’ Futurecraft and Nike’s Flyprint leverage AM for hyper-personalized shoe midsoles (1M+ pairs sold in 2024) .
3. Injection Molding’s Counter-Innovation
Traditional manufacturing is evolving:
Hybrid Tooling: 3D-printed molds with conformal cooling cut cycle times by 20% (e.g., Ford’s 96-second dashboards vs. 120 seconds) .
AI Optimization: Arburg’s self-learning systems boost yield to 97% by real-time pressure/temperature control .
Sustainable Materials: Bio-based TPU (40% lower CO₂) and chemical recycling (85% PET recovery) meet EU CBAM regulations .
Rapid Tooling: Stratasys’ 3D-printed inserts reduce mold lead times from months to days for short-run production .
Mass Customization: "Print farms" like Jinqi (China) produce 5M+铰链龙 toys/year for global e-commerce, blending AM agility with batch economics .
Digital Warehousing: Siemens’ AM Network stocks digital part files—physical goods print on-demand near customers, slashing inventory costs .
3D Printing Growth: $290B by 2025 (23.5% CAGR), driven by aerospace/medical in North America (35% revenue share) .
Injection Molding Resilience: 90% of plastic parts still molded—scale economics lock in dominance for >10k-unit orders .
Profit Pools:
AM thrives in <$100k/project niches (prototypes, custom medical).
Molding owns >$1M/project volume production .
3D printing won’t replace injection molding—it’s rewriting its role:
✅ For Innovation/R&D: AM’s speed dominates prototyping, custom implants, and complex aerospace parts.
✅ For Mass Production: Molding remains unbeatable for toothpaste caps, LEGO bricks, and iPhone casings.
✅ For the Future: Hybrid "factories of one" will merge AM’s flexibility with molding’s scale via AI-driven workflows.
Deploy AM for high-value, low-volume parts (medical, aerospace, luxury goods).
Integrate conformal cooling into molds to defend molding’s cost edge.
Monitor material breakthroughs: Ceramic AM (34% CAGR) and CFRTP composites (38% market share) .
The future isn’t winner-takes-all—it’s right tool, right job.
In the realm of modern plastic manufacturing, extrusion and injection molding stand out as two fundamental processing techniques. Each boasts unique strengths, making them suitable for distinct scenarios. The decision to use one over the other hinges on factors like product design, material properties, production scale, and budget. Let’s delve into a detailed comparison to help you determine which method aligns with your needs.
Extrusion Molding
Extrusion molding operates by first heating plastic raw materials until they reach a molten state. The molten plastic is then forced through a specially designed die, which shapes it into continuous profiles or forms. These shaped materials are subsequently cooled to solidify, resulting in consistent, long products. This method is inherently designed for producing continuous, elongated, or tubular items such as pipes, films, and wires.
Injection Molding
Injection molding starts with heating plastic pellets to a molten form. The molten plastic is then injected under high pressure into a closed mold cavity. Once inside, the plastic cools and solidifies, taking on the exact shape of the mold. This technique excels at creating small, intricately shaped parts with high precision.
Extrusion Molding
Extrusion is the go-to choice for high-volume production of continuous products. It shines when manufacturing items like:
● Plastic pipes (for plumbing, irrigation, etc.)
● Films (packaging films, agricultural films)
● Packaging materials (plastic bags, wraps)
● Wires and cables (insulated with plastic sheathing)
Its efficiency peaks when producing long, uniform shapes, as the continuous process ensures consistent quality across large quantities.
Injection Molding
Injection molding is ideal for crafting small, detailed, and complex components, including:
● Electronic housings (for smartphones, laptops, and other devices)
● Automotive parts (dashboards, connectors, brackets)
● Medical components (syringe parts, device casings)
Its key advantage lies in its ability to replicate intricate geometric shapes with tight tolerances, making it perfect for parts with fine details.
The following pictures are examples of the custom injection molding services we provide
Extrusion Molding
Extrusion offers significant cost benefits in high-volume production. Here’s why:
● Lower mold costs: Extrusion dies are simpler in design compared to injection molds, reducing upfront expenses.
● Continuous process: Once set up, the extrusion line runs continuously, minimizing downtime and maximizing output.
This makes it ideal for low-cost, high-volume products where consistency and scale are priorities.
Injection Molding
Injection molding has higher initial mold costs due to the complexity of designing and manufacturing closed molds. However, it excels in:
● Medium to small-scale production: The precision of injection molding ensures each part meets strict standards, even in smaller batches.
● Complex parts: Its design flexibility reduces defect rates for intricate components, offsetting higher mold costs over time.
We have a complete system of mold making and regular maintenance.
Extrusion Molding
Extrusion works seamlessly with a wide range of plastics, including:
● Commodity plastics: PE (polyethylene), PVC (polyvinyl chloride), ABS (acrylonitrile butadiene styrene).
● Specialized materials: High-temperature plastics and glass fiber-reinforced plastics.
It allows for precise control over material flow and stability during processing, ensuring consistent results across different materials.
Injection Molding
Injection molding is compatible with various engineering plastics, such as:
● PC (polycarbonate), PA (nylon), PBT (polybutylene terephthalate).
It excels with materials requiring high strength, toughness, and temperature resistance, making it a staple in industries like automotive and electronics.
Extrusion and injection molding are both valuable tools in plastic manufacturing, each with its own niche. To decide which is right for you:
● Choose injection molding if you need high-precision, small-batch, or complex-shaped parts (e.g., electronic housings, automotive components).
● Opt for extrusion for long, simple-shaped products requiring large-scale production (e.g., pipes, films, packaging materials).
By aligning your choice with your product’s design, production scale, material needs, and budget, you’ll ensure efficient, cost-effective manufacturing.
If you have any custom requirements for plastic products, please contact us and send us your drawings.
For businesses and buyers involved in injection molding procurement, the "Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ)" is a critical factor that directly impacts production costs, inventory management, and business operations. Understanding what MOQ entails, the factors that shape it, and how to navigate it can help optimize procurement strategies and boost operational efficiency. This article breaks down the concept of MOQ in injection molding and shares practical insights for businesses and buyers.
Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) in injection molding refers to the smallest number of units a manufacturer or supplier requires for a single production run. It is not a fixed number but is determined by a combination of factors, including mold costs, production cycles, material procurement, and production efficiency.
A key principle to note: higher MOQs often lead to lower per-unit costs. This is because large-scale production allows manufacturers to spread fixed costs (like mold expenses) across more units, reducing the burden on each individual product. For example, if a mold costs $10,000, producing 10,000 units would amortize $1 per unit for the mold, while producing 1,000 units would add $10 per unit—making the latter significantly more expensive per piece.
MOQ is not arbitrarily set; it is shaped by three core factors that directly affect a manufacturer’s costs and efficiency:
Mold Costs
Molds are one of the largest upfront investments in injection molding. Designing, manufacturing, and maintaining high-quality molds can cost thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars, depending on complexity (e.g., multi-cavity molds vs. single-cavity molds). To recoup these costs, manufacturers set MOQs that ensure the mold investment is spread across enough units. For instance, a complex mold for automotive parts may require a higher MOQ than a simple mold for plastic toys, as the former’s higher upfront cost needs more units to amortize.
Production Efficiency
Injection molding machines operate most efficiently when running long, continuous production runs. Stopping and starting machines for small orders wastes time (e.g., setup, calibration, and cleaning) and increases per-unit labor and energy costs. Manufacturers thus set MOQs to ensure each production run is long enough to maximize machine utilization. For example, a manufacturer with a machine that produces 1,000 units per hour may require an MOQ of 5,000 units to justify a 5-hour run, rather than stopping after 1 hour for a 1,000-unit order.
Material Procurement
Raw materials (e.g., plastic resins) are often purchased in bulk to secure lower prices and ensure a steady supply. Suppliers of materials may themselves have MOQs—for example, a resin supplier might require a minimum order of 500kg. If a manufacturer’s client orders a small quantity that only uses 100kg of resin, the manufacturer would be left with excess material, increasing costs. Thus, the manufacturer’s MOQ for the client may align with the material supplier’s MOQ to avoid waste.
MOQ affects both sides of the transaction—manufacturers and buyers—in distinct ways:
Impact on Businesses (Manufacturers)
● Advantage of higher MOQs: Larger orders allow manufacturers to achieve economies of scale, reducing per-unit costs (mold, material, and labor). This improves profit margins and makes pricing more competitive.
● Challenge of high MOQs: For small manufacturers or those serving niche markets, strict high MOQs may limit their customer base, as smaller businesses cannot meet the requirement.
Impact on Buyers
● Challenge of high MOQs: A high MOQ forces buyers to purchase large quantities upfront, tying up capital in inventory and increasing storage costs. This is especially burdensome for small businesses or startups with limited cash flow, as well as for buyers testing new products (where demand is uncertain).
● Advantage of lower MOQs: Lower MOQs offer flexibility—buyers can order smaller batches to test markets, reduce inventory risk, and adapt to changing demand. For example, a startup launching a new plastic gadget can use a low MOQ to produce 500 units, gauge customer response, and then scale up if sales are strong.
If your business needs smaller orders but is faced with a high MOQ, consider these strategies to negotiate or reduce the requirement:
Multiple Small Batch Production
Some manufacturers offer "staged production," where buyers split their total order into smaller batches spread over time. For example, instead of a single 10,000-unit order with a 10,000 MOQ, a buyer could place two 5,000-unit orders, with the second batch produced 3 months later. This reduces the upfront quantity while still ensuring the manufacturer hits their overall volume target.
Shared Production Plans
Collaborate with other buyers to combine orders for similar products. For instance, two businesses needing plastic containers (same size, material, and mold) can share a production run, splitting the total quantity. If the manufacturer’s MOQ is 10,000 units, each buyer could take 5,000 units, effectively halving their individual MOQ.
Customized Mold Design
Work with manufacturers to design molds that are cheaper to produce or more flexible. For example, a "family mold" (which produces multiple small parts in one run) can reduce mold costs, allowing the manufacturer to lower the MOQ. Alternatively, using simpler mold designs with fewer cavities may reduce upfront costs, making a lower MOQ feasible.
MOQ in injection molding is a balancing act between manufacturers’ need to cover costs and maintain efficiency, and buyers’ need for flexibility. By understanding the factors driving MOQ—mold costs, production efficiency, and material procurement—both parties can make informed decisions.
If you’re a buyer with small order needs, don’t hesitate to negotiate with manufacturers: explore staged production, shared runs, or customized molds. For manufacturers, offering flexible MOQ options can attract a wider range of clients, especially in a market where agility is increasingly valued.
By aligning MOQ with your business goals—whether scaling production or testing new products—you can optimize costs, reduce risk, and drive growth in the injection molding supply chain.