King 4B vs Benge 165F

[pfcastor]

Are these the same horn with different inscriptions? I've seen pictures of both and they look identical. Since King owned Benge, I am wondering if the Benge 165F is just a relabel King 4B?

[walldaja]

Look carefully at the Bb / F key. On the King it is behind the brace going to the bell while on the Benge it is in front of that brace. Also the tubing coming from the rotor toward the bell (away from the neck piece) on the King is slanted at an angle toward the bell. On the Benge it goes parallel to the brace from the neck piece to the bell. With that in mind I would call them different horns.

[BGuttman]

They are definitely different. The 4B has two tuning slides in the F-attachment (one is intended for the E-pull; the other to tune). The shape of the attachment is different. I loved my 4B but didn't really like the 165F I tested. Different strokes, I guess.

[JohnL]

The 165F has brass outers while the 4B's are nickel. Pretty sure the Benge's f-attachment tubing is .562" while the King's is .547".

I would expect (but have no specific evidence) that the leadpipe is different.

I've seen a lot of positive comments about the 190, but the 165 seems to get more of a "meh".

[Posaunus]

I think the Benge 165F is a very nice trombone - superior to the King 4B. The 190F may be better yet, but only marginally so, unless you insist on a more open wrap.

To paraphrase previous TC posts:
The Benge trombones were designed by Chuck Ward. In the late 1970s, he developed these horns based on the King designs, using as many King parts as possible, but updated to compete with Bach and Conn for orchestral use. The Benge 190 and 165 bells are apparently actually based on the King 5B bell (same mandrel / taper), not the 4B as is commonly assumed - but it is 8½" in diameter instead of 9", and it is annealed as well. The annealing process was perhaps the biggest innovation developed for these horns, and it is the secret sauce Edwards and Shires has adopted for certain bells in their lines. The other big improvement made was that the F attachments are 0.562" diam instead of 0.547" as on the King 4B and 5B, and they have a more open neckpipe and unique leadpipe.

I still maintain the the Benge trombones (including the 165F) are seriously underrated - and underpriced on the used market.

[disco]

I have owned a 4b, the 165f and a 190f. For me, the 165 had the best sound. It felt like my old 88h that I should have never sold. Only the valve was better. My 190 was much newer than my 165 and the bell just wasn’t as rich sounding to me. I thought my 4b was a fun horn but I really had trouble blending with the section when I played it. They don’t seem to be very popular here in California.

[greenbean]

From my experience... slide outer material is different, as pointed out above, leadpipes are very different, F wraps are different in shape and size, bell brace location and trigger set-up are different. I believe the valves are the same.

I have owned several examples of each: 4B, 165F, and 190F. Every 4B has been excellent. Most 190F's were great, too. Pretty similar in playing characteristics but probably darker and more "orchestral" sounding. The early ones seem to be better than the later ones. 165F's? Good but not quite on par with the other two models. The valve lever on the 4B is very different than the 2 Benges, it should be pointed out. Some folks like it; some don't. I love my Benge 190F but the valve lever ergonomics make it impossible for me to play. I will be having it customized soon. It is a phenomenal horn.

[Posaunus]

[Benge 165F} ... felt like my old 88h ... only the valve was better.

They [Benge trombones] don’t seem to be very popular here in California.

Yes, I think the Benge 165F is indeed reminiscent of a 1960s Conn 88H - and the valve is indeed better.

Although they were designed to be - and are - professional-grade instruments, Benge trombones never really cracked the "professional" market, and apparently most of them (especially the 165F) were sold as "student horns'' to high school and college players in the midwest. And they were not manufactured for very many years. So not very many of them made it to the east and west coasts until they were older, and perhaps not in great condition. I see very few in California.