“The trend is moving towards the level of automation one can achieve in tooling. Along with that, there will be a strong focus on whether there is scope to improve cycle times and also improve the robustness of the tool being built,” says Santosh Kulkarni, Vice President, Bajaj Auto
-Neha Basudkar Ghate
Q. What are the main challenges you see in the automotive sector when it comes to tooling and mould development?
The challenges in the automotive field are very specific and quite demanding. One of the first things is that time to market is absolutely critical. Launch schedules are tight, so if tools are not ready on time it directly impacts overall timelines.
The second challenge is consistency. Tooling represents a very large capital investment, and we expect stable and reliable output. Even a small niggle or minor failure can disrupt the entire supply chain, which ultimately affects product viability. So consistency is just as important as speed.
The third major challenge is lead time. And when I say lead time, it’s not only about the actual tool manufacturing time, but the entire cycle from the moment of engagement at the design stage right through to final execution. Because our turnaround times are so fast, and the number of tools needed every year is huge, capacity becomes extremely important.
Finally, the third ‘C’ after consistency and capacity is capability. Capability refers to the improvements required for quality, for cycle time optimisation, and for ensuring that the tooling delivers an efficient, cost‑effective product.
So, to put it simply, the challenges in the automotive sector really come down to the three C’s: Consistency, Capacity, and Capability.
Q. How has the demand for high‑precision tooling evolved in recent years, especially in the automotive sector?
Eastern Europe has been a big tooling base, and for a long time many tools were imported from there. To be very honest, the requirement for extremely high‑precision components has grown significantly in the last five to seven years. It’s not that this precision wasn’t needed earlier, it was required, but the quantum was much smaller. So, a lot of companies were dependent on external tool makers or foreign tool rooms to cater to this demand.
But now, with the rise of electronics in automotive and electronics in general becoming more and more prominent in every product, the demand for precision tools has risen sharply. In India too, there are captive tool rooms that have started venturing into areas where extremely high precision is needed. A few companies have dared to step into that space for example, in connectors and various electronic components. In these areas, the requirement is not only very high precision but also very short cycle times, because millions of parts are needed every month.
Q. How has this shift impacted the tool‑making landscape in India?
This growing requirement for high‑precision tooling has exposed the fact that there has been a real shortage of good tool rooms doing substantial work in this area. But the trend is changing. With companies like Foxconn, TE Connectivity, Toyota and others setting up operations in India, the demand for a local precision tool industry is increasing.
If you look at areas like caps and closures, earlier these were largely imported or filled by import substitutes. Now the demand is changing the entire landscape. Over the last ten years, we’ve seen a big transformation, and more players are coming in. That said, the scope and scale at which this is happening is still very limited, which means there is huge potential for more companies to step into this space.
Q. Looking ahead, what key trends do you see shaping the future of tooling?
The trend is definitely moving towards the level of automation one can achieve in tooling. Along with that, there will be a strong focus on whether there is scope to improve cycle times and also improve the robustness of the tool being built.
Another important factor is tool life expectancy. Today people usually talk about tools lasting five lakh or ten lakh shots, but many products stay in the market for ten years or more. That means the tools also need to last much longer. At present, the reality is that after maybe one million shots or so, a tool often has to be replaced. Addressing this gap is going to be a crucial trend, especially at the extreme end where product life cycles are very long.
At the other extreme are products with very short life cycles where only a few thousand parts are needed. In those cases, it’s not viable to make a heavy capital‑intensive tool. So, the challenge is finding tooling solutions that can cater to both ends of the spectrum very high durability and very small production runs while still working with the same primary processes.
Q. Beyond automation and tool life, what other factors will define how tool makers adapt to the future?
Cost is always a big one, but it can’t just be about low cost. What really matters is achieving the correct cost. That means using the right steel, the right manufacturing technology, highly optimised design, and ensuring the shortest possible lead time. Only then can costs remain under control without compromising on quality or tool performance.
We also have to consider the impact of emerging markets like EVs. As electric vehicles grow in India, the demand for tooling for battery components is increasing rapidly. The challenge is that battery technology itself changes every year. That makes fast turnaround time absolutely essential.
A good analogy is the smartphone industry: take the iPhone, for example. When a new model launches, they’re already prepared to sell the first million units immediately. Then, just a year later, a new model comes out with completely new tooling, but scaled at the same massive level. That kind of speed and adaptability is exactly what local tool makers here will need to gauge and adapt to in order to keep up with these emerging trends.
Q. How do you see the role of quality benchmarking in the Indian tooling industry?
Quality benchmarking is one of the biggest challenges for our Indian tool industry. The moment you choose to make a tool locally, but you’ve also seen or used an imported one, there’s a natural tendency to compare them. And often, there’s a noticeable difference in performance it could be in cycle times, or even smaller aspects of running the tool.
What our tooling industry needs to do is benchmark themselves. It could be in manufacturing practices, in design, in tolerances, in clearances it’s always a combination. But to reach global standards, our tool makers have to carry out their own gap analyses, identify the root causes of differences, and then address them. Otherwise, they will continue to be seen as Tier‑2 or Tier‑3 in terms of quality.
The specifications from the customer side don’t change. My expectations of cycle time, of consistency, of low maintenance they all remain the same, whether I import a tool or make it in India. But today, if I buy a tool from Germany for X thousand dollars and also make the same tool here, and then give both to a good manufacturer to run, I would often hear comments like: There’s no flash in the imported tool, the cycle time is better, the temperature accuracy is higher.
It’s not that the Indian tool cannot manufacture the parts, it can but there’s a difference in how it functions. That is where benchmarking comes in. We need to ask: is this difference caused by design, by steel quality, or by production practices? Benchmarking could be done individually by each tool maker, or jointly across the industry, but it’s essential if we want to match global standards.
Q- And what about standardisation – how important is it for the industry?
For me, standardisation is absolutely necessary. I said this even during our panel discussion without standardisation, it is almost impossible to achieve the lowest costs, the best quality, and also consistent quality.
Standardisation ensures that whatever you produce, whether locally or for global markets, meets the same baseline requirements. It reduces gaps, enables benchmarking to be meaningful, and gives tool makers a path to close the gap with international competitors. Without it, we will always be battling inconsistency.
COMMENTS