Request for quotation: pricing a defined part on a comparable basis

Fix the variables before you ask for a number

State the quantity basis and the release pattern, because a price for annual volume delivered monthly differs from the same volume called off weekly. State the packaging, the delivery point and the delivery term, since a supplier quoting from its gate and one quoting to your dock are not offering the same thing. State the approval evidence required and the tooling arrangement. State the currency, the payment terms and how long the price must stand. Each of these left open is a lever a supplier can pull to look better than a competitor who assumed differently.

Ask for a breakdown, not only a total

Requesting the price split into material, process, any purchased content, tooling, packaging and freight changes what you can do with the response. It exposes the supplier who is materially cheaper on process and expensive on material, which is a negotiable position rather than a verdict. It reveals whether tooling is being amortised into the piece price. It also lets you see when two suppliers have assumed different material grades or different amounts of secondary work, which a single total hides completely. Suppliers vary in willingness, and the request itself is informative.

Price breaks and the volume you will actually order

Ask for pricing at more than one quantity, including quantities below your expectation. The step pattern reveals where the supplier's batch and setup economics change, and it protects you against the common outcome where the programme runs at a fraction of the forecast and the price quoted at full volume was never available. It also exposes the quote priced optimistically against a volume the supplier does not believe, which will resurface as a request to reprice as soon as the real order pattern becomes visible. Ask which quantity the supplier itself considers most likely, and note when that differs from the one you gave them.

Time, effort and how many suppliers to ask

Each enquiry consumes engineering time on both sides, and a quotation for a drawn part with tooling is not a quick exercise. Sending to a wide list makes each supplier's expected chance of winning small, which reduces the effort they invest and pushes them toward defensive pricing. A tight list of genuinely capable candidates, each told how many others are quoting and roughly when the decision comes, produces better-considered prices. Allowing a realistic response window matters too: a compressed deadline produces padded numbers. State clearly what the decision will be based on, since suppliers price uncertainty about the award process into the number as readily as they price uncertainty about the part.

What the questions in the returned quote tell you

Read the clarification requests as carefully as the prices. A supplier that asks about datum interpretation, material equivalents, the intended function of a tight feature or the packaging orientation is engaging with the part. One that returns a price with no questions has either made this part many times or has not looked at the drawing. Distinguishing between those two possibilities before award is worth more than a small price difference, and it is easily done by asking how they intend to hold and inspect the part. Keep a record of clarifications raised, because the ones nobody asked about are where the assumptions will later diverge.

Frequently asked questions

How long should suppliers be given to return a quotation?

Long enough for the plant to route the part, check tooling requirements, obtain material pricing and, where relevant, get a subcontract quote for secondary operations. Rushing that sequence produces a number with contingency built in, or a number that will move after award. Where the deadline genuinely cannot move, say so and ask the supplier to state which elements are estimates, so you know which parts of the price are firm and which will be revisited.

Should the target price be shared with suppliers?

Practice divides sharply. Sharing a target focuses effort on how to reach it and can surface design changes that get you there, which is valuable during development. It also caps the possibility of a supplier quoting below your target and anchors the negotiation at your number. A defensible middle path is to withhold the target in a first competitive round and introduce it afterwards, framed as the level the business case requires, when discussing how to close the gap.

What should you do when every quote comes back above budget?

Treat it as information about the specification rather than about the suppliers. Consistent overshoot from capable, independent factories usually means the design carries cost the business case never accounted for: a tolerance forcing an extra operation, a material with limited supply, a finish requiring an outside process, or a volume too small for the process chosen. Reopening the design with a supplier process engineer recovers more than another negotiation round on a part that is simply expensive to make.