My conclusion is that engineers / designers should aim for geometry symmetry resulting in at least 2 identical parts, rather than mirroring parts, resulting in 2 not identical but very similar ( and often confusing ) parts. Engineers should make things as simple / low cost as can be right?
Sheet metal component is a poor example as it's unlikely to have a front and back plate that are identical. I include it here as an example of the possible. The copy is a component copy revolved 180 deg but symmetry design makes it a mirror.
Here, the top inserts are not symmetrical - they are (mirrored) parts in an component.Creation sketches ( pair ) had an asymmetrical feature of the radius and subsequent symmetrical cuts in other planes have produced a mirrored 3D part. Interesting that 3D manipulation still keeps their associations. Moved from original creation planes, subsequent symmetric cuts are tricky and time consuming to produce.
