Speaking with Lionel Favre, Product Design Director of Jaeger-LeCoultre, about complicated Reversos.
During the Watches and Wonders Geneva caught up with Jaeger-LeCoultre Product Design Director Lionel Favre to talk about the ground-breaking Reverso Quadriptyque watch — the most complicated in terms of its construction — and spoke about the history of this iconic watch's complicated models.
Were there any completely unexpected difficulties or surprises when you began developing the first complicated Reverso Tourbillon at the beginning of the 90s? Or did everything go to plan?
Henry-John Belmont’s request was completely unexpected, who headed Jaeger-LeCoultre after the manufacture was acquired by the Richemont holding company. He asked for us to look into the possibility of creating a tourbillon movement for our iconic watch. That was after the Reverso Soixantième '60ème' model was launched for the Reverso's 60th anniversary.
After all, few people even knew what a tourbillon was back in those days, and even fewer remembered the last Jaeger-LeCoultre tourbillon we made in the late 50s to early 60s. And suddenly we were tasked with creating a wristwatch tourbillon. Did we encounter any problems in the process?
Well, if you don’t count the fact that we didn't have any blueprints or people who had ever made a tourbillon, nor did we have the necessary technical means to make them, then I guess we didn't have any problems overall (laughs).
But in the end we managed to present the Reverso Tourbillon in 1993, which paid tribute to the traditions of haute horlogerie and at the same time also contributed to the general revival of interest in this category of watches in the 90s.
And how did you overcome these challenges?
If you've ever been to the museum at out manufacture, you'd know that Jaeger-LeCoultre has already managed to make every complication in the past, including complications for other big watchmakers. We gathered all the necessary documentation and came up with a way to adapt the tourbillon for wristwatches. We began working on Caliber 828, which we created from scratch.
But developing and launching new mechanisms is a what we do, and you could say it's fairly routine for us. And as it happens, we were thinking about how the Reverso could be developed going forward while we were working on this job: the perpetual calendar, the chronograph, the jumping-hour indication and the minute repeater. So we have the Reverso to thank for reviving many of today’s favorite wristwatch complications.
Jaeger-LeCoultre presented the Reverso Répétition Minutes in 1994, just after the Reverso Tourbillon. Does the shape of the watchcase matter to achieve a good sound, be it round or rectangular?
The main problem here is with the shape and position of the gongs, as they're usually round in both shape and cross-section, but the Reverso has a rectangular case. In the end, we had to create rectangular gongs. And this was really very complicated and challenging, especially in order to achieve an acceptable volume and rich tone. We always prioritize sound quality over intensity.
It's very important for us, and sometimes we're prepared to sacrifice volume for quality. Creating the slider lever that activates the striking works wasn't an easy task either. The special characteristics of the Reverso case leave it without any protection from impact, including unwanted knocks, which is why we needed to make it as effective and reliable as possible. A full team of designers and engineers was drafted to work on the slider.
But you also had and still have the Memovox alarm wristwatch. Surely the know-how from Memovox was at least of some use to you when you were creating the repeater?
Oh, come on! They're two completely different things in terms of how they're constructed and how they function. The alarm doesn't have any gongs. The hammer strikes the caseback. Sound quality isn't as important as volume or sharpness. No, nothing in the Reverso Répétition Minutes came from Memovox.
When the Reverso Triptyque came out, everybody wanted to know how the third dial was connected with the rotating case and movement. Does the Reverso Quadriptyque have the same system of connection or did you have to invent a new one?
It's pretty much the same system for advancing the indications. We used our existing proprietary technologies. However, the new system in the Reverso Quadriptyque was more complicated and improved in many ways. In the Triptyque, a pin extends out of the main case movement to advance the indications in the cradle.
The Quadriptique doesn't have a power reserve indication anymore and it's connected directly, which has made the interaction between the double-faced case and double-faced cradle more efficient and reliable. We came to this decision after spending ten years studying the idiosyncrasies and intricacies in how the system for connection functions in the Reverso Triptyque.
In all the descriptions and press releases you state that your fabulous new Reverso Quadriptyque has 11 different complications, but I've counted fourteen. How come?
You probably counted each of the perpetual calendar's indications as separate functions, but we count them as one unified complication. We count the number of complications, not the number of apertures.
The first Reverso case was made of about 30 parts. How many components does the case for the Reverso Quadriptyque have? Which components were specially made to be used in it for the first time?
The Reverso Quadriptyque has 88 parts. Considering the first piece was unveiled at the Watches & Wonders trade show, we still tend to see it as more of a prototype which could still be tweaked with some small changes to improve and simplify as we go about the process of launching it for serial production.
It's still hard to say exactly how many new components there'll be. You can write that just over 80 percent of the components are new and have been specially made for the Reverso Quadriptyque. You can't go wrong with that.
Who equipped the Reverso Quadriptyque with what I would call such a special magic presentation box? And by the way, how does it work?
The work of an entire team of masters has gone into that mechanism. From the outset, they said it'd be very difficult and risky for the mechanism to adjust readings for the perpetual and astronomical calendars. That's we needed to find a way to help owners avoid having to do so if they haven't worn the watch for a long time. You have to admit that the Reverso Quadriptyque isn't a watch for everyday wear.
And if the need to set all the hands and adjust the indication readings does arise, then this process has to be made as safe and easy as possible. That's why the special presentation box was invented, which makes it possible to do so. We decided not to equip this box with a winding mechanism (ed. watches with hand-wound movements have been around for a long time).
Watches shouldn't run non-stop, especially such complicated models. It would ultimately lead to unnecessary wear for components and waste lubrication. That's why this special box was created with a clever built-in mechanism drawer comprised of 300 parts, which is able to correct all the calendar indications and set the exact time. Not all complicated watch mechanisms can boast such a large number of components.
In order to fit the movement inside the compact Reverso Quadriptyque, you decided to invent a new and very complicated system of disk indications instead of using your famous patented system of axes. Was it worth it?
Definitely. If we'd have kept the system of axes with the hands mounted on it, the case would have had to expand. But regardless of how complicated the model is, we decided the case height shouldn't exceed a maximum of 15 mm so that the watch is comfortable to wear and isn't awkward for any other reason.
And since we have the hands on the front dial, we installed the Jumping Digital Hour on the second dial behind it, where the minute repeater is positioned.
Can we expect a Reverso Pentaptyque ten years from now in 2031?
(Laughs,) you're right. You know our manufacture well. But what about before the Reverso Pentaptyque… Will it be worth waiting ten years?