# Caso práctico: cómo Lianping Luggage redujo costes un 30 % con estuches EVA a medida

Canonical URL: https://evacasemanufacturer.com/es/news/case-study-how-company-lianping-luggage-products-reduced-costs-by-30-with-custom-eva-case-solutions
Published: 2025-02-17 17:30:00
Author: Dongguan Lianping Luggage Co., Ltd.
Publisher: LIANPING
Keywords: eva case cost reduction case study, custom eva case roi, eva vs injection moulded pp case cost, eva tool case moq 500, drop test ista 2a eva case
Views: 3.025
Language: es

Un distribuidor alemán de accesorios redujo el costo de embalaje cerca del 30 % con un estuche EVA personalizado. Vea las tres fuentes del ahorro y las pruebas que lo respaldaron.

The customer is a mid-size power-tool accessory brand in northern Germany. In their own post-season review, dated this spring, the packaging line item for a 32-piece bit and socket kit came down by roughly 30% after they moved from a blow-moulded PP case bought through a trading company to a compression-moulded EVA case bought direct from Dongguan Lianping Luggage Co., Ltd. The figure is theirs. What we can show is where it came from.

## The three places the cost came out

- Unit price: the EVA shell with a die-cut foam insert landed roughly 22-28% below the previous moulded PP case at the same volume. Compression tooling costs a fraction of an injection tool, and the yield on nested cut sheet beats a sprue-and-runner system.

- Freight: the case is 12-15% lighter and the lids nest, so a 40 ft container carried an estimated 8-11% more sellable units on the same route.

- Returns: their damage-related return rate on this SKU went from what they described as 'close to 2%' to under 0.5% across two seasons, which removed a credit-note cost they had never charged to packaging. None of those three alone reaches 30%. Stacked, they do.

## What actually changed in the specification

The shell was not the interesting part. The saving came from redesigning the interior: the old case carried a generic egg-crate lid over a loose-moulded tray, so the kit needed a second insert and a printed sleeve to stop small bits migrating in transit. We cut a two-layer die-cut insert - 3 mm black over 2 mm orange - with a dedicated slot for each of the 32 parts, and the printed sleeve was dropped entirely. Wall thickness came down from a nominal 3.0 mm to 2.4 mm in the non-load areas while the rim section was left full, which took about 60 g out of each unit. EVA sheet density sits at 0.18-0.22 g/cm3, and the laminated 1680D Oxford outer carries the abrasion resistance rather than the shell itself, so thinning the wall costs less than it sounds.

## The checks before it shipped

Loaded to 2.4 kg (about 5.3 lb), the case went through a 1.2 m drop on all six faces, three drops per face, per ISTA 2A practice, and the zipper was cycled 5,000 times on a fixture because the zipper is usually the first thing to go. The buyer's own lab repeated the series and added a -10 degrees C cold soak, which is the condition that normally splits a thin rim; the 2.4 mm wall held because the rim was never thinned. This work sits inside our [EVA tool case range](https://evacasemanufacturer.com/es/products/sub/eva-tool-case), and the same sequence - interior first, shell second - is what we apply to every cost-reduction brief handled through [customization](https://evacasemanufacturer.com/es/customization).

MOQ was 500 pieces for the first run with tier pricing at 500 / 1,000 / 3,000, and the sample round took two iterations over about three weeks including their lab time. Their third reorder, 3,000 units, is being moulded this week with a laser-etched logo plate on the lid; the plate cost a one-off setup fee and nothing per unit.

## FAQ

**How did the case study achieve a 30% packaging cost reduction?**

The saving stacked from three sources: the EVA shell with a die-cut insert priced roughly 22-28% below the previous moulded PP case, freight improved because the case was 12-15% lighter and nested, and damage returns fell from close to 2% to under 0.5%. Removing a second insert and a printed sleeve also cut assembly cost.

**What MOQ applies to a cost-reduction project like this one?**

The first run was 500 pieces, with tier pricing at 500 / 1,000 / 3,000. Cost-reduction projects usually reach their best unit price at 1,000 or above, because press setup, lamination batches and tooling amortisation spread over more units, typically removing another 8-14% from the 500-piece price.

**Is a thinner EVA wall still strong enough for drop testing?**

Yes, if the rim section is left at full thickness. This project went from a 3.0 mm nominal wall to 2.4 mm in non-load areas, saving about 60 g per unit, and still passed a 1.2 m drop on all six faces plus a -10 degrees C cold soak in the buyer's own laboratory.

---
Contact: anton2@qq.com