• Master
    5 Jul 2016, 7:37 p.m.

    In 2002, in a small conference room off of Georges Kern's office suite, the decision was made to kill the Ref 3712 Rattrapante. "It has too many parts", it was believed to have been said, and "we need to use some of those parts for other watches, or we will run out". Just how many parts the 3712 contained was a well-guarded secret, though some believed the actual number wasn't so clear. Every time they counted the parts, they came up with a different count. It was a contentious issue that likely caused much friction.
    I personally believe the reason for discontinuation had more to do with a key employee leaving the company than anything else. According to the transcripts, it was mentioned that "now that the assembler with the "jimmy" legs has left, what's the use?"
    While my sources could not confirm the actual conversation, they did point out that a watchmaker whose limbs often moved involuntarily had recently left the business and that he indeed assembled 3712 movements, or at least had, until a huge inventory of components was discovered scattered all over the workshop floor. The last comment heard through that conference room door in this regard was "Oh My God!".

    Well, anyway, when I first learned about all of this, I disassembled my own 3712 to see what was inside and my first thought was "Damn! There's a lot of parts in this watch", leading me to conclude that this was, after all, the real reason the watch was discontinued and not because of the poor fellow flinging pinions about, though certainly he had to have played a role.

    What we do not now know for certain is whether or not the 3712 will ever come back to stay and leave again. One Limited Edition does not a product strategy make, but I believe they at least found enough parts to make a few more watches.

    TR
    tnr.homestead.com/IWC/3712svc1.jpg

  • Master
    5 Jul 2016, 8:37 p.m.

    Very funny Terry. Emperor Joseph II also made a similar comment about the Marriage of Figaro - "too many notes, Mozart". :-)

  • Master
    5 Jul 2016, 10:20 p.m.

    I'm rolling on the floor......too many notes indeed!!

  • Master
    5 Jul 2016, 10:52 p.m.

    I love it Terry - hope you are making the trip to NYC!

  • Master
    6 Jul 2016, 9:54 a.m.

    Lol lol lol, really a great tale!

    Thanks Terry!

    Best,

    Bob

  • Master
    6 Jul 2016, 11:05 a.m.

    Another IWC mystery solved! Thanks, Terry, for this 'informative' article!

    Nelson (see you next week)

  • Master
    6 Jul 2016, 7:57 p.m.

    The ref. 3712 rattrapante was a 'handwind' movement with a power reserve of 44 hours. It was featured in the catalogs from 1995 to 2005.

    Another model, the ref. 3713 rattrapante, uses almost the same parts except that it is an automatic wind and likewise was featured in the catalogs in roughly the same years as the above.

    Although different in case design with the former in the Portugeuse collection while the latter in the Pilot collection, I think there might have been some overlap and perhaps fewer people opting for the ref. 3712 handwind model. I don't know production statistics for neither and I'm just guessing.

    While the basic movement is almost the same as IWC's earlier simpler chronographs the special parts for both rattrapante movements were made by IWC and are exclusive to IWC. In smaller series they may have been costlier to produce those parts.

    Like other models in their line, I think the company moved on to make room for newer designs that are more in tune with the times. These are just my personal and unofficial comments.

    Regards,
    Jack Freedman

  • Master
    7 Jul 2016, 3:12 a.m.

    well... the 3712 may have too many parts, but at least it has 1 part missing--the rotor. laugh

  • Master
    7 Jul 2016, 7:25 p.m.

    I was suspect of this scholarly article until I saw the author. It has to be true.

  • 7 Jul 2016, 8:44 p.m.

    Terry, I so told you this story was confidential ;) LOL.

  • Master
    8 Jul 2016, 10:44 p.m.

    Jack, wonderful to see you posting here and indeed I'd forgotten about the automatic!

  • Master
    8 Jul 2016, 10:49 p.m.

    Terry, please help and put me out of my misery!

    I've counted and recounted the parts in the photo now umpteen times. Never once to arrive at the same tally! In desperation, I tried reverse polish notation / calculation too... Even tried counting the parts going anticlockwise!

    How many parts were there?