I read the article and agree with him on just
about everything. I think Leupold definitely is a good scope on heavy recoiling rifles. I personally feel that Leupolds quality has gone downhill lately and I am basing this on hearsay and not my own personal experience. I have not bought a new Leupold in years. He also says little about Zeiss Conquests which are a really good scope and which I own. He does mention in there that Kenny Jarrett says Swarovski scopes are the best and Leupolds are the best value. I have no problem with someone that says Swarovski is the best because quite frankly their 1" models are the best 1" optics made anywhere. On the other hand they also cost double what a corresponding Leupold would. Mr Jarrett also happens to be a Swarovski dealer and has built a few rifles for higher ups in Swarovski both president and sales managers so I think he is a bit biased IMHO just look at his website
www.jarrettrifles.com and see what he features. He is also to my knowledge the only gunbuilder that has come out with a statement like that most recommend Leupold. Mr Barsness as well is rather biased when it comes to Leupold . Who to believe ?.. well since there are no consumer reports concerning Riflescopes
you pay your money and hope for the best. I have had zip problems with most scopes I have purchased(with exception of Burro I mean Burris ) and one Bushnell that crapped out on a mighty 308 Sako but I usually purchase only upper middle to higher grade optics. I also have 2 simmons scopes mounted on Rimfires which are really good scopes and a great value for the money. I have also witnessed members at my gun range shoot 338 win mags with Tascos mounted on them and not one bit of problem although I couldn't believe my own eyes but yes they are thoroughly satisfied with that brand.