I was a toolmaker for a lot of years. Been there and done it.
I just was saying there's a difference between tweaking an existing mold and building a new one. In today's age, it's actually probably pretty easy for a competent toolroom to replicate an existing mold, at least to the level we wouldn't know the difference. But that's still building a new one, not tweaking an old.
Gotcha. When I said "tweak" I meant it in the sense that it would require a new PDGA approval. It's technically a new mold by PDGA standards, even if the difference is imperceptible. Sounds like you meant tweaking as in literally taking the physical mold and modifying it. I see how as a toolmaker that's the definition you'd use, but I don't think that's what the average disc golfer means when they talk about new molds, tweaking old ones, etc.
For example, when Innova needed a new physical mold for the Roc3 a few years back, they didn't go through the PDGA approval process again. The only reason the average person even knew that something had changed was because of the zipper tops that started showing up. But the specs of the mold didn't change, so it wasn't considered a new mold by PDGA standards even though the actual physical mold was a new (identical to old) one.
FWIW, I consider "tweaking a mold" to mean building a physically new mold that is extremely similar, but not identical to, an existing mold. I consider "building a new mold" to mean starting the disc design process from scratch, or changing significantly enough to warrant a different disc profile and/or flight. But again, I can see how as a toolmaker that's not the terminology you'd use.