Taking Time, Not Orders.

At David Wolfe Design, our goal is to provide options for reducing your costs and dramatically improving efficiency.

In today’s global marketplace, the injection mold has become a commodity. While this might be acceptable for light bulbs, milk, bread and eggs, an injection mold doesn’t fit the true definition of a commodity. With a 50-year history of mold design and manufacturing, every mold we build adheres to certain principles of design and construction that result in a mold that will run fast, last long, and has the proper design documentation so that maintenance and revisions can be efficiently implemented. We help our customers realize long term profitability by implementing a design and build strategy that is driven by the customer’s requirements. In order to do this, it is important for us to have a clear understanding of the production environment at our customer’s facility.


Case-in-Point 1:

A customer asked for a 4 cavity mold with hydraulically actuated slides to run in a 400 ton molding machine. The customer expected t0 run 42 second cycles and planned to produce an average of 1 million parts per year. Since we had a familiarity with the customer’s facility, we suggested that we could build a less expensive 2-cavity mold with tulip-style slides that would retract and return by the motion of the press and move off the core with the part, therefore allowing the mold to run much faster and reducing maintenance requirements. Molds with slides often suffer damage due to mistakes made during startup. By eliminating the cylinder actuated slides, we could ensure the mold would always start up safely. The customer purchased our mold for much less than they expected, and ended up running about 4 million parts at 14 second cycles. All this was made possible because David Wolfe Design made an effort to know the customer, the facility, and the requirements rather than quoting a simple request.

Case-in-Point 2

Another customer came to us with a request for a thermoformed housing/industrial enclosure, and only needed 200 parts per year. After understanding the design of the part, we decided to quote two options. Option A was a thermoform tool that would cost $3,500. Option B was a simple aluminum injection mold with only air ejection, which could be built for $7,000. Option B, the injection mold, would produce parts from plastic pellet with far less scrap and a 1 minute cycle time. When we factored in secondary operations that would be required with both options, such as trimming, drilling holes and machining slots, the break-even analysis showed that Option B, the injection molded part, would be more economical after producing only 400 parts. That was in 2003. By 2009, the mold has run over 2500 parts.