Injection Molding RFQ Template: 18-Field Buyer Spec Sheet & Quote Checklist

Injection molding quotes often come back slow, widely different ($9,000 vs $28,000 on the same part), or not at all. The supplier is rarely the main problem—the RFQ arrives incomplete. Given 3D geometry without resin grade, annual volume, SPI mold class, cosmetic zones, or tolerance callouts, a molder pads the quote for unknown risk, sends a clarification list, or deprioritizes the inquiry.

When This Template Is Most Useful

Use this template if you are buying injection molding for the first time and want to know exactly what fields toolmakers and molders require, if you are running a low-volume or bridge project where tooling strategy is still open, or if you are comparing domestic and offshore suppliers and need normalized quotes that price the exact same scope.

What Is an Injection Molding RFQ?

A plastic injection molding RFQ (Request for Quotation) is the structured engineering and commercial specification package a supplier needs to calculate tooling capex, cycle time, press tonnage, and unit piece price.

A complete RFQ package lets a supplier:

• Judge part complexity. Geometry, undercuts, wall thickness (1.5–3.0 mm), and critical-to-quality (CTQ) tolerances drive moldability and slide/lifter count.
• Lock down a tooling strategy. Annual volume and program life determine whether every bidder prices an SPI Class 104 aluminum/P20 bridge tool or a Class 102 hardened H13 (48–52 HRC) multi-cavity production mold.
• Price material, batch size, lead time, and quality deliverables. Each is an independent cost driver that diverges wildly when left unstated.
• Make quotes comparable line by line. When three bidders price the same cavity count, steel grade, runner type, and inspection scope, you compare true manufacturing efficiency rather than guesswork.

Copy-Ready 18-Field Injection Molding RFQ Specification Sheet

Copy this 18-field specification table directly into your RFQ cover sheet or spreadsheet so every quoting molder prices the identical engineering baseline:

#	RFQ Specification Field	Example Buyer Entry (Copy & Edit)	What Happens if Left Blank
1	Part Number, Revision & Files	PN-40210 Rev B — .STEP (AP214) + 2D .PDF drawing with 6 CTQ dimensions	Supplier quotes from 3D CAD only and misses tight bore/flatness tolerances
2	Part Envelope & Projected Area	145 × 82 × 34 mm; nominal wall 2.2 mm; part weight 44 g; projected area 118 cm²	Delayed quote while estimator manually calculates shot weight and clamp tonnage (~50–80 Ton)
3	Resin Family, Grade & Trade Name	PC/ABS FR — SABIC Cycoloy C2950 (UL94 V-0 @ 1.5 mm) or approved equivalent	Bidders price generic commodity resin or pad raw-material cost by 20–35%
4	Color & Masterbatch Standard	RAL 7016 Anthracite Grey (3% salt-and-pepper masterbatch; pre-colored compound required for Class A)	Unspecified color defaults to natural/black; custom color minimums (250–500 kg) surprise buyer at PO
5	Regrind & Virgin Resin Policy	100% virgin resin required (0% regrind allowed for UL94 V-0 / medical structural part)	Supplier assumes 15–25% runner regrind blend to lower piece price
6	Estimated Annual Usage (EAU) & Program Life	25,000 pcs/year × 5-year program life (125,000 total parts)	One shop quotes a 1-cavity soft tool; another quotes a 4-cavity hardened tool
7	First Order / Batch Release Quantity	Initial launch PO: 2,500 pcs; subsequent quarterly releases of 6,250 pcs	Piece price excludes machine setup amortization ($350–$800 per setup) on small batches
8	Target SPI Mold Class & Cavity Count	SPI Class 103 (100k–500k cycles), 2 cavities, P20 (28–32 HRC) core/cavity with H13 (50 HRC) gate inserts	Uncomparable quotes ranging from S50C carbon steel to H13 hardened steel
9	Mold Base & Press Interface Standard	DME / LKM Inch-Equivalent (4140 28–32 HRC A/B plates, Ø3.990 in ring, NPT water, SPI KO pattern)	Overseas tool arrives with metric Ø100 mm ring and BSPT fittings that cannot mount in a US press
10	Runner & Gate Architecture	Cold runner with submarine (tunnel) gate on B-side internal rib (no gate vestige on exterior)	Toolmaker defaults to an edge gate on the visible outer perimeter requiring manual hand-trimming
11	Cosmetic Zones & Surface Finish	Exterior housing = Class A (VDI 27 / MT-11020 texture); interior = SPI B-2 (no ejector pins on Class A)	Ejector pins or parting-line mismatch land directly on the customer-facing surface
12	General & CTQ Dimensional Tolerances	General tolerance per ISO 20457 TG5; 4 bearing bores held to ±0.05 mm (Cpk ≥ 1.33)	Supplier applies loose commercial tolerances (±0.25 mm) and charges ECO fees to groom steel later
13	Secondary Operations & Assembly	Install 4× M3×5 mm brass heat-set inserts + 1-color pad print logo on top cover	Buyer is forced to coordinate a separate secondary vendor and pay double freight
14	Quality & Inspection Deliverables	5-piece CMM First Article Inspection (FAI) report at T1 + material Lot COA + RoHS/REACH certs	Supplier ships T1 samples in a bag with zero dimensional measurements
15	Packaging & Labeling Specification	Layer-packed in polybags (50 pcs/carton) with foam dividers; max pallet height 1.2 m	Bulk-dumped loose parts scuff Class A texture during truck transit
16	Incoterms & Delivery Destination	Quote both EXW Factory and DDP Columbus, OH 43215 (itemizing duty and freight)	Hidden 28.1% tooling tariff or ocean container cube costs invalidate the offshore piece-price comparison
17	Target Schedule (T1 Samples & SOP)	T1 samples required in 6 weeks ARO; production SOP release 10 weeks ARO	Quoted “5-week lead time” turns out to be T0 shop test, excluding 3 weeks of shipping and T2 grooming
18	Tooling Ownership & Bailment Terms	100% buyer-owned mold, native 3D .STEP tool CAD, and 5 last-shot sample trees included in tool price	Supplier claims proprietary design rights over cavity inserts or charges a “tool release fee”

Part Design Information Suppliers Need

A CAD file answers many questions, but suppliers still need you to flag intent that geometry alone does not communicate. The more of the following you can call out, the fewer assumptions a supplier has to make:

• Part dimensions and overall envelope, so the supplier can size the tool and machine.
• Wall thickness, including whether walls are intended to be uniform and where they vary.
• Undercuts, which may require side actions or lifters and affect tooling cost.
• Ribs and bosses, especially their thickness relative to the adjacent wall.
• Draft angle, whether draft is already applied, and where it cannot be added for functional reasons.
• Cosmetic surfaces versus surfaces that are hidden or non-critical.
• Critical dimensions that must hold tolerance for the part to work.
• Assembly interfaces, mating parts, snap fits, threads, seals, and how this part fits the larger assembly.

If you are not sure your part is moldable as designed, resolve that before you send the RFQ. For geometry that molds cleanly and changes suppliers commonly request, see the plastic part design-for-manufacturing guide.

Material and Finish Requirements

“Plastic” is not a material specification. Resin choice affects price, shrinkage, tooling, cycle time, and whether the part performs in its environment. More precision here means a more accurate quote.

Try to provide:

• Resin family (e.g. ABS, PC, PP, nylon/PA, POM).
• Grade, if you know it, or a named reference grade you’re targeting.
• Acceptable alternatives or equivalents, so the supplier can offer something they stock or run more efficiently.
• Color, plus how it will be matched: your colorant, a masterbatch, or a color standard.
• Texture, including any specific texture standard or “as-molded smooth.”
• Cosmetic vs non-cosmetic surfaces, so the supplier knows where appearance matters.
• Performance requirements that constrain the material: UV resistance, flame rating, impact, chemical resistance, temperature, food or skin contact, and so on.

If you genuinely don’t know the material yet, say so. Write “open” in the field instead of leaving it blank, and describe the application and environment so the supplier can suggest options rather than guess. A blank field reads as an oversight; “open” reads as an invitation.

Volume, Tooling and Production Assumptions

Volume and intent drive the tooling strategy, and tooling is usually the largest single cost in a molding project. Be explicit about how many parts you need and what the program is meant to do.

• Estimated annual usage (EAU). Even a rough range helps the supplier choose tooling and cavitation.
• First order quantity. The first run is often different from steady-state demand. State both.
• Prototype vs production intent. Are you validating a design, or committing to ongoing production?
• Low-volume vs bridge vs production. These point to different tooling strategies, not just different quantities. For where the boundaries blur and how to frame quantities, see the low-volume injection molding buyer guide.
• Number of cavities. You can specify this, or ask the supplier to recommend cavitation for your EAU.
• Expected tool life. How many total parts the tool may need to produce over its life.
• Tool ownership. Who owns the mold, whether you can transfer it later, and where it is stored.

Tooling choices have long-term consequences for cost, lead time, and your ability to move work later. For mold construction and questions worth asking, see mold-making considerations.

Quality and Documentation Requirements

Quality requirements can change a quote substantially. Include only what you actually need, and be clear when you do need it. Over-specifying documentation you don’t require inflates the quote. Omitting documentation you do require leads to a re-quote later.

Consider whether you need:

• Dimensional inspection, a basic dimensional report against your drawing.
• First article inspection (FAI), a formal first-article report on initial parts.
• Material certificates, certs of conformance or analysis for the resin.
• PPAP, the Production Part Approval Process, where your program or industry calls for it.
• Cpk / Ppk capability indices, only specify these if you genuinely require statistical capability data, because they carry real cost.

Quality system certifications such as ISO 9001 or, for medical work, ISO 13485 are best treated as supplier evaluation considerations. This is general buyer guidance, not regulatory or legal advice. If your product is regulated, confirm requirements with the appropriate qualified resource.

Common RFQ Mistakes That Lead to Bad Quotes

Most quoting problems trace back to a handful of missing pieces. The table maps each gap to the assumption suppliers tend to make and how to close it.

Mistake	What suppliers assume	How to fix it
No STEP file (only a PDF, image, or sketch)	They guess at geometry, or decline to quote	Provide a 3D model, preferably STEP
No estimated annual usage (EAU)	They guess at tooling and cavitation, often conservatively	State EAU and first order quantity, even as a range
No material specified	They assume a default resin that may not perform or may not be in stock	Name a resin family and grade, plus acceptable alternatives
No tolerance notes	They assume standard tolerances, which may be too loose or needlessly tight	Add a 2D drawing flagging critical dimensions
Unclear cosmetic requirements	They assume a finish level, either too high (costly) or too low (rejected)	Mark cosmetic vs non-cosmetic surfaces and name the finish
No target timeline	They schedule against their own backlog, not your need	State when you need first parts and ongoing parts
No tooling ownership discussion	They assume their standard ownership/storage terms	Specify who owns the tool and whether it can transfer
Asking only “how much per part?”	They quote part price without tooling, or with hidden assumptions	Ask for tooling cost, part price, and what’s included/excluded

Copyable Injection Molding RFQ Template

Copy the template below into an email or document and fill in each field. Leave a field blank only when you genuinely have no answer yet, and flag it as open so the supplier knows it’s a question, not an omission.

INJECTION MOLDING RFQ

1. PROJECT OVERVIEW
   - Company / contact:
   - Part name / number:
   - What the part does / application:
   - Prototype, bridge, or production intent:

2. PART FILES
   - 3D CAD attached (format, e.g. STEP):
   - 2D drawing attached (yes/no):
   - Critical dimensions / datums noted on drawing:

3. MATERIAL
   - Resin family:
   - Grade (if known):
   - Acceptable alternatives / equivalents:
   - Color and how it's matched:
   - Texture / surface finish:
   - Performance requirements (UV, flame, impact, chemical, temp, contact):

4. VOLUME
   - Estimated annual usage (EAU):
   - First order quantity:
   - Future / repeat order expectations:

5. TOOLING EXPECTATIONS
   - Preferred tooling strategy (or "supplier to recommend"):
   - Number of cavities (or "supplier to recommend"):
   - Expected tool life:
   - Tool ownership and storage:

6. QUALITY REQUIREMENTS
   - Dimensional inspection / report needed:
   - First article inspection (FAI):
   - Material certificates:
   - PPAP (if applicable):
   - Cpk / Ppk (only if required):
   - Quality system relevant to evaluation (e.g. ISO 9001 / 13485):

7. SECONDARY OPERATIONS & PACKAGING
   - Inserts, printing, assembly, welding, etc.:
   - Packaging requirements:

8. TIMELINE
   - Need first parts by:
   - Need ongoing parts by:
   - Any fixed milestones:

9. COMMERCIAL NOTES
   - Target budget or range (optional):
   - Shipping destination / Incoterms:
   - Payment terms expectations:

10. QUESTIONS FOR THE SUPPLIER
   - What is included and excluded in the quote?
   - What assumptions did you make to price this?
   - What design changes (if any) would you recommend?
   - What is the cost of a tool revision?
   - What is the lead time for tooling and for first parts?

How to Compare Supplier Responses

A consistent RFQ makes quotes comparable. A consistent comparison framework makes the decision clear. When responses come back, resist sorting by the biggest number on the page. Line them up against the same line items. A low part price routinely hides a high tooling cost, a long lead time, or scope that simply is not in the quote.

Quote item	Why it matters	What to check
Tooling cost	Usually the largest upfront number, and tied to tooling type	What tool material and tooling strategy does it buy?
Part price	The recurring cost that compounds over the program	At what quantity break is it quoted?
Tooling ownership	Decides whether you can move the tool later	Who owns the mold, and is that stated in writing?
Sample rounds	More rounds mean more time before approval	How many T1/T2 samples are included before extra charges?
Revision cost	Tool changes after cutting steel can be expensive	What does a typical revision cost, and what counts as one?
Inspection / documentation	Quality scope is where quotes quietly diverge	Are dimensional reports, FAI, or certs included or extra?
Shipping, duties, landed cost	The ex-works price isn’t what you actually pay	What’s the total delivered cost, including freight and duties?
Lead time: tooling vs production	These are two separate clocks, often confused	What’s the lead time to build the tool vs to run production parts?

Two softer signals are worth weighing alongside the table. First, the quote assumptions: what each supplier filled in where your RFQ was silent. Fewer and more reasonable is better. Second, any DFM comments: a supplier who flags a wall-thickness or undercut concern with their quote has actually looked at your part, which often matters more than a slightly lower price.

Comparing the full picture is how you avoid buying the cheapest quote instead of the best fit. For evaluating the suppliers themselves, see the supplier capability checklist. To sanity-check tooling and part-price figures, see the injection mold cost guide.

Buyer FAQs

What files are needed for an injection molding RFQ?

An actionable injection molding RFQ requires three core documents: a 3D CAD solid model in .STEP (AP214/AP203) or .XT (Parasolid) format, a 2D engineering drawing in .PDF format calling out critical-to-quality (CTQ) tolerances, datums, and cosmetic Class A/B/C zones, and an 18-field RFQ specification sheet defining the exact resin grade, estimated annual usage (EAU), first-order batch quantity, and target SPI mold class. Run your package through the RFQ Readiness Checker before sending.

Is a STEP file enough to get an injection molding quote?

A .STEP file alone is sufficient for an initial ballpark tooling and piece-price estimate (±15–25% accuracy), because the estimator can extract part volume (cm³), projected area (cm² for clamp tonnage), wall thickness, and undercut slide count directly from the 3D geometry. However, a .STEP file cannot convey tight bore tolerances (±0.05 mm), surface texture (VDI 3400 / SPI), gate-vestige restrictions, or resin grade—so a firm, contract-ready quote always requires pairing the .STEP file with a 2D drawing and written RFQ spec sheet.

How do I make injection molding quotes from different suppliers comparable?

To normalize competing injection molding quotes, lock down four tooling and process assumptions in your RFQ upfront: specify the exact cavity count (e.g., 2 cavities), the SPI mold classification and cavity steel (e.g., Class 103 pre-hardened P20 at 28–32 HRC vs Class 102 hardened H13 at 48–52 HRC), the runner system (cold runner vs heated manifold), and the minimum production batch release (e.g., 2,500 pcs per setup). Without those four constraints, one molder will quote a low-cost 1-cavity soft tool with a high piece price while another quotes a multi-cavity hardened tool.

Should I specify the exact plastic grade or just the resin family?

Always specify both the resin family and a reference commercial grade—for example, “SABIC Cycoloy C2950 (UL94 V-0 PC/ABS) or buyer-approved equivalent”—rather than writing generic “ABS” or “Nylon.” Within a single resin family, glass reinforcement (30% GF), flame-retardant packages (UL94 V-0), and UV stabilizers change mold shrinkage (0.3% vs 1.5%), required tool steel (420SS or H13 vs P20), and raw resin price by $1.50 to $6.00+ per kg.

Why do injection molding suppliers ignore or delay responding to RFQs?

Suppliers typically deprioritize an RFQ for one of three reasons: missing baseline inputs (no 3D .STEP file, no resin specified, or “quote 100 to 100,000 parts” without a realistic annual volume), press-tonnage mismatch (sending a 600-ton automotive bumper part to a precision micro-molder running 25–150 ton presses), or unrealistic commercial expectations (requesting a multi-slide production tool in 2 weeks). Providing the completed 18-field specification table above signals a qualified buyer and moves your inquiry to the front of the estimating queue.

Disclaimer

PlasticsTechnologyAlliance.com is an independent buyer resource. It does not manufacture parts, provide quotes, or operate a supplier directory. Costs, terms, and timelines are supplier- and program-specific. Confirm them in writing with your suppliers.