Berkline Sofa Reviews (2026)

Across these four styles, the differences came down to how plush the seat feels and how much structure the back gives you. Style 496 was the softest and most loungey—great for marathon movies, but also the easiest to slump in. Style 491 sat steadier and more upright, which helped for laptop time and quick sit-to-stand. Style 389 landed in the middle and felt like the most “everyday” choice. Style 40008 kept a smaller footprint and ran a touch firmer, making it easier to fit into tighter rooms.

We evaluated each sofa using a consistent checklist so differences weren’t just first impressions. Marcus Reed focused on long-sit comfort and posture drift, Jenna Brooks tracked setup and cleaning friction, and Ethan Cole watched how each sofa behaved in tighter rooms—especially when fully reclined near a wall.

Scores cover seven categories: Assembly, Cooling, Comfort, Durability, Layout Practicality, Cleaning, and Value. We also noted edge support, arm comfort, and how often you have to “reset” cushions to keep things even.

Our Testing Experience

Style 496 was the most “sink-in” option we tried. The seat has a cushioned, pillow-top feel that makes it easy to sprawl, and the arms are soft to lean on. Over longer sits, that plushness can let your posture drift—comfortable, but not especially structured.

What we liked

• Plush, pillow-top seat that relaxes fast

• Soft arms that work well for side lounging

• Recline was workable close to the wall once placed carefully

Who it is best for

• Movie-night lounging and casual TV rooms

• People who like a softer seat and don’t mind a looser sit

• Households prioritizing comfort over an upright silhouette

Where it falls short

• Anyone who wants firmer lumbar feedback

• Hot sleepers who notice warmth buildup

• Tight layouts where depth steals walkway space

Pros & Cons

Details

• Configuration: Reclining 2-seat sofa

• Overall dimensions (W x D x H): 90" x 41.5" x 40"

• Cushion firmness (our test): Plush

• Seat construction: CMAX pillow-top seat construction

• Arm style: Pillow-style arms

• Back system: EasyOff removable back system

• Recline options noted for the group: PowerRecline, TouchMotion, Wallaway

• Cooling / breathability (our use): Moderate

• Support for different body sizes (our use): Comfortable for average-to-larger bodies; posture control matters for heavier loungers

• Ease of cleaning (our use): Medium-to-high effort (plush creases hold lint and crumbs)

• Pet-friendliness: Medium (depends heavily on upholstery)

• Durability (our use): Good, but cushions benefit from regular “resetting”

• Assembly / setup (our use): Manageable—removable backs helped in tight entryways

Review Score

Our Testing Experience

Style 491 felt like the “steadier sit” in this lineup. It still reclines comfortably, but the seat and back held us in a more neutral position, so it worked better for mixed use—watching TV, chatting, or opening a laptop without immediately sliding into a deep slouch.

What we liked

• More upright, balanced sit than the plushest style

• Firmer edge feel for easier sit-to-stand

• Good recline comfort without feeling overly bulky

Who it is best for

• People who bounce between upright sitting and reclining

• Laptop use, reading, and conversation seating

• Homes that want a recliner sofa without max plushness

Where it falls short

• Shoppers chasing the softest “pillow-top” lounge feel

• Rooms where every inch of depth matters

• Anyone who wants very firm seating

Pros & Cons

Details

• Configuration: Reclining 2-seat sofa

• Overall dimensions (W x D x H): 87.5" x 42" x 39.5"

• Cushion firmness (our test): Medium-plush

• Arm style: Petite pillow-style arms

• Back system: EasyOff removable back system

• Recline options noted for the group: PowerRecline, TouchMotion, Wallaway

• Cooling / breathability (our use): Moderate

• Support for different body sizes (our use): More stable for heavier sitters than ultra-plush builds

• Ease of cleaning (our use): Medium (less seam trapping than 496)

• Pet-friendliness: Medium (depends on upholstery)

• Durability (our use): Good shape retention feel

• Assembly / setup (our use): Straightforward; removable backs helped with tighter turns

Review Score

Our Testing Experience

Style 389 came across as the most “do-it-all” option. It stayed supportive enough for normal sitting, while still feeling comfortable in full recline—with better leg-support feel and less of that sliding-forward sensation over time.

What we liked

• Best overall mix of comfort and support

• Leg support felt more natural in recline

• Cushions recovered well after long sessions

Who it is best for

• Most households that want one versatile recliner sofa

• People who switch positions frequently

• Long daily use where comfort and support both matter

Where it falls short

• Shoppers who want the plushest, deepest sink-in feel

• Very small rooms where width still feels big

• Anyone who wants ultra-firm seating

Pros & Cons

Details

• Configuration: Reclining 3-seat sofa (line also offered a 2-seat option)

• Overall dimensions (W x D x H): 95" x 38.25" x 39"

• Cushion firmness (our test): Medium

• Design note: ComfortRest design for added leg support in recline

• Back system: EasyOff removable back system

• Recline options noted for the group: PowerRecline, TouchMotion, Wallaway; 2- or 3-seat configuration options

• Cooling / breathability (our use): Moderate-to-good

• Support for different body sizes (our use): Most forgiving across different heights and weights

• Ease of cleaning (our use): Medium
  

• Pet-friendliness: Medium

• Durability (our use): Very good balance of cushion “give” and recovery

• Assembly / setup (our use): Easier than expected with removable backs

Review Score

Our Testing Experience

Style 40008 felt like the easiest one to place in a real room. The shallower profile and slightly firmer seat made it simpler to sit upright, shift positions, and get up without feeling like you’re climbing out of deep cushions.

What we liked

• Shallower footprint that fits tighter layouts

• Steadier seat for upright sitting

• Best cooling feel of the four in longer sessions

Who it is best for

• Smaller living rooms where depth matters

• People who like a slightly firmer sit

• Everyday use where you’re up and down often

Where it falls short

• Those who want the softest melt-in recline feel

• Very tall loungers who want maximum sprawl space

• Shoppers who want heavy cushion “hug” from arms and back

Pros & Cons

Details

• Configuration: Reclining three-seat sofa

• Overall dimensions (W x D x H): 89.75" x 36.5" x 39.75"

• Cushion firmness (our test): Medium, slightly firmer feel than 496

• Line note: Comfort Series grouping with CMAX pillow-top seat construction

• Back system: EasyOff removable back system

• Recline options noted for the group: PowerRecline, TouchMotion, Wallaway

• Cooling / breathability (our use): Good

• Support for different body sizes (our use): Better for average heights; very tall loungers may want deeper seating

• Ease of cleaning (our use): Lower effort (shallower seams and fewer deep creases)

• Pet-friendliness: Medium

• Durability (our use): Consistent feel across weeks, less dramatic compression

• Assembly / setup (our use): Easiest of the four for tight entry angles

Review Score

The scores line up with what we felt: Style 496 leads on pure lounge comfort, but gives up ground in cooling, cleaning, and space efficiency. Style 389 stays near the top across most categories. Style 40008 scores best for smaller-room practicality, while Style 491 is the steadier choice if you spend time sitting upright.

If you want the softest, lounge-first feel, Style 496 is the match—just expect more slouching over long sits. For a steadier, more upright seat that still reclines well, Style 491 is the safer pick. If you want one everyday recliner sofa with the fewest trade-offs, Style 389 is the most balanced. And if room depth is your limiter, Style 40008 tends to fit better thanks to its shallower profile. When buying used, confirm dimensions and recline clearance on the exact piece you’re considering.

These are legacy models, so used listings won’t always match one spec sheet. Mechanisms and upholstery can differ by configuration and condition, so confirm measurements and test the recline function before you commit.

A well-kept Berkline can still be a strong secondhand value if you want classic, overstuffed recliner comfort. The main upside is simple: these styles were built around lounging.

• They deliver a classic, plush “TV sofa” feel that’s hard to replicate in many modern minimalist designs.

• Near-wall-friendly reclining options can help in tighter placements (depending on the mechanism).

• If the frame and mechanism are in good condition, the comfort-to-price ratio can be excellent on the used market.

If you’re shopping new (or you want a warranty and consistent options), consider current reclining sofas from major manufacturers:

• La-Z-Boy Morrison Reclining Sofa: widely available, family-style recliner sofa.

• Flexsteel Henry Power Reclining Sofa: premium power option with headrest/lumbar controls and USB convenience.

• Bradington-Young Raiden Reclining Sofa: higher-end motion sofa with power headrest options and broad upholstery choices.

• Measure your doorway and the turns you’ll need to make; recliner sofas can be awkward in tight entries even when the backs remove.

• Ask whether the back is removable (EasyOff-style). It can make moving, cleaning behind the sofa, and re-positioning much easier.

• Check the recline clearance in your room. “Near-wall” mechanisms help, but you still need space for the footrest to extend.

• On used listings, inspect seat seams and high-contact areas for wear, cracking, or loose stitching.

• Test the mechanism on both ends. Listen for clicks, uneven movement, or spots where it binds.

• Look for uneven cushions or obvious sagging. Some softness is normal; a “hammock” feel usually isn’t.

Style 496 felt the most “sink-in and stay” comfortable for long movies. If you like a softer seat and don’t mind a bit of posture drift, it’s the coziest pick.

Style 40008 was the easiest to place in a tighter room thanks to its shallower profile. It reclines well without taking up as much depth.

Style 389 struck the best overall balance. It supported normal sitting, handled full recline comfortably, and didn’t feel as fussy as the plushest option.

All four were easier to handle than a one-piece recliner sofa thanks to the removable-back design. Style 40008 was the least stressful in tight entries, and Style 496 took the most planning due to its bulk.