Interactive tool

Prototype Strategy Tool

Match the prototype route to the real job of the build. Compare low-volume processes against quantity, cosmetic fidelity, functional fidelity, urgency, unit budget, and your willingness to commit to tooling.

Inputs
Results

Want help interpreting this for a real product?

Send the current result context to the contact page, review the generated note, and email Andrew when you are ready.

Send this result to Andrew

When to use this

Choose the prototype route around the question the build must answer.

A prototype is not automatically better because it looks more production-like. The right route depends on quantity, fidelity, urgency, budget, and whether the design is mature enough to justify tooling commitment.

What the recommendation means

The score is a route-fit signal. A high score means the method is a reasonable match for the current build brief, not that it is the final manufacturing route. Close scores should trigger a discussion about what evidence the next prototype must create.

If CNC and 3D printing score closely for a functional validation build, the better choice may depend on tolerance, material behaviour, and whether cosmetic finish matters yet. If bridge tooling wins, check that the design is stable enough first.

What to do next

  • Write down the one decision the prototype must unlock.
  • Separate looks-like, works-like, and production-like requirements.
  • Check whether the selected route creates reusable learning or only a better-looking sample.
  • Use production strategy planning before moving from prototype to bridge or pilot production.

FAQ

Should the prototype use the final production process?

Only when the question requires it. Early builds often need speed and learning more than production fidelity.

When is bridge tooling sensible?

Bridge tooling is useful when demand or test needs exceed one-off prototypes, but the product is not ready for full production commitment.