I am trying to decide which one to use, I like the idea of a high BC, plastic tip bullet that is also bonded. All advertising bullshit aside, what are the real differences between these two bullets, as far as performance goes? For example, is one tougher than the other?
Thanks!

I hope others have had better results but so far I've tried Sciroccos in two calibers and was unable to get anything remotely resembnling good groups with them. Fouling was also poor.

To date I have not tried accubonds.

I too gave up on the Scirocco's, after only having intermittant luck and average groups. Even tho I love to reload, the fun was gone after trying a dozen different powders and loads in the rifles I tried. I can get the same or better performance from both Nosler Partitions and old-style Solid Bases. The AccuBond's have been stellar performers (in both factory rounds and reloads), and I really love them in my 375 H&H.

Good Gawd son....all the difference in the world. Try the Accubonds...you will like. Very Very accurate, very nice performance on game, and no copper fouling like the Swifts. Now, shoot enough, and you will get fouling...that's understood...just nowhere like the Swifts.

I don't like Sciroccio's on deer at all....and this is real world experience, not what I read in some magazine.

I tried them in my 300 RUM and accuracy sucked, I
even had some go thru the target sideways I thought that I had shot a real tight group but then I saw the other two holes
Charlie

I've got no experience with the Scirroco but I have shot the Accubonds with real good results, much like everyone else. I load and practice with Ballistic tips and switch to Accubonds to hunt with, absolutely no change in point of impact when using same weight bullets and all components are the same.

Hey Blank tell me more about your .375 loads, what weight? and what are you shooting with that baby?

I have loaded accubonds in a 7mm with good results as far as grouping is concerned. I have not tried them on game though. As far as the siroccos go, I have not used them. I have a few friends that tried them and they were not happy with them at all.

I've had excellent results with the AB in both 7x57 and 257 Roberts. Both guns shot one hole groups and on game they killed well. The sciroccos never shot under 3 inches.

Accubonds grouped quite well in my rifles but sciroccos grouped poorly with extreme copper fouling.

Another vote for the AB's they shot well and also killed well. All of the game I shot this year had complete pass throughs.

I've never had an accuracy issue with ballistic tips, infact I
have found them to be the accuracy standard for comparing every other hunting bullet...
and I imagine that the AB's are more of the same;
I.E. consistant Nosler quality.

I was thinking about trying Swift's Scirocco, even though they are a couple of pennies more (plus the $30 the Swift #1 reloading manual) but after reading the comments above now I won't bother, between $38 for a box of 100bullets and $39.99 for the manual plus the $40 on 2lb of propellant I'd use in the testing? that's a $100+ lesson I don't need to learn myself....

AllanD

Don't forget about the Hornady Interbonds.

I like the Accubonds a lot, performance and accuracy are excellent.

3 shot group center to center .26 distance 200 yards
5 shot group center to center .51 distance 200 yards



Federal 260 grain Accubond .375 H&H on Wild Boar

Federal 260 grain Accubond .375 H&H on Bison Bull - Cartridge & bullet, recovered weight 226 Grains

Federal 260 grain Accubond .375 H&H on Bison Bull - Bullet, recovered weight 226 Grains


Roland

It's hard to understand why the sciroccos are still out there after reading this thread.....

The more interesting thing is that my experience is totally different with A-Frames...excellent accuracy and fouling isn't at all a problem. I wish I could explain this.....but it is what it is...make your decisions and move on.

Swift has supposedly made some minor changes to the scirocco and sellin them as the scirroco II. Dunno if that has changed anything about how they fly. Come to think of it, they didnt fly real well in my 7mm Rem mag either. Oh well, I can burn em up during barrel break in. The accubonds fly real straight in my 375 though.

quote:

It's hard to understand why the sciroccos are still out there after reading this thread.....

The more interesting thing is that my experience is totally different with A-Frames...excellent accuracy and fouling isn't at all a problem. I wish I could explain this.....but it is what it is...make your decisions and move on.

Ditto Ditto

I've run both out of my 270. The Scirrocos did very well on deer (both small deer far out and big ones up close), but accuracy was not good (2 inch groups on a good day), and I think I was just plain lucky to hit that little one far off. Fouling, as noted by others, was pretty bad.

As of last season, I recovered 3 deer (2 well after the fact) shot with the Accubond. Performance on game was similar (meaning good); and I get much better accuracy with much less fuss.

And, both Accubonds and Interbonds are a whole lot cheaper than the Swifts!

Good luck!

friar

I've tried loading Sciroccos in 3 different calibers and wound up selling the left-over bullets. Groups of 1.5-2.5" were the norm, and, in those firearms, that was simply not acceptable. The Accubonds, on the other hand, have given the same type of surgical accuracy that the Ballistic Tips provide -- and, in fact, in my .308 WCF, the same combination of components gives virtually identical velocity and accuracy while maintaining the same point-of-impact as my Ballistic Tip loading.

Even better, you can pick up seconds through the Nosler web site and save some $$$ in the process. Now if Nosler would just introduce a 6.5mm Accubond...

Tried scirocco 150's in my 7mm rem. mag. they shot 3" groups also in my .308 win. same results. Just no good won't bother with them again.

Interesting..... The scirroccos were deadly accurate in my 30-06. But then again that rifle shoots most anything well. The Scirrocco has become my go to bullet in that gun however. Happy hunting.

Very interesting thread. I have some real world experience with both of them and feel that they are both great bullets, they just offer different things.

I shoot a .300 Winchester Magnum and my load with the 180 grain Swift Scirocco chronographs an average of 3,162 fps. My load with the 200 grain Nosler Accubond chronographs an average of 3,038 fps

With that said, I have shot or witnessed shot with the Swift Scirocco:

1 cow elk - lasered at 608 yards
1 cow elk - estimated at 400 yards
1 spike bull elk - estimated 150 yards
1 6 point bull elk - estimated 40 yards
1 cow elk - lasered 273 yards

I have shot with the 200 grain Accubond, or seen shot with the 180 grain Accubond:

1 5x5 bull elk - estimated 70 yards
1 cow elk - estimated 475 yards
1 cow elk - estimated 75 yards
1 4x4 Mule deer buck - estimated 125 yards
1 5x5 bull elk - estimated 30 yards
1 cow elk - estimated 150 yards

I did not notice any real world difference that the bullet made in the demise of any of these critters. None of them made it 50 yards before expiring, with most of them going down on the spot (3 out of 5 Scirocco kills and 3 out of 6 Accubond kills).

As far as recovered bullet go the advertising holds true. Nosler retains 50-60% and looks very similar to an expanded partition while the Swifts retain 70+% and have a slightly larger expanded profile.

A lot has been said about accuracy, or lack therof for the Scirocco. Has not been my experience. Once I refined my load for both bullets I fired five three shot groups to get a good average. Subsequently I have continued to keep track of group sizes and for a running average here is what I have at 100 yards

Scirocco - .886"
Accubond - 1.12"

I have been shooting the 200 grain Accubond since they came out, but with the new Scirocco II coming on line and the experience I have had with them in the past I am going to try a few more "real world" elk experiences with them

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
Now if Nosler would just introduce a 6.5mm Accubond...

I'd like to see a 6.5mm Nosler Accubond at 130gr.

the 120's are too short to load out long enough for best accuracy in my long throated swede and the 140's are heavier
than what I really need for whitetails....
Not to mention that 130's would probably go just a touch faster than the 140's

I always like the Hornady 129's for their shape length and velocity, I am not a fan of their construction now if Hornady would make a 129gr 6.5mm interbond I'd try them...

I'm still waiting for a 30cal 165gr Accubond as well..

AllanD

The 30 cal 180gr Sciroccos are like lazers out of my 30-378 Weatherby. Get 1" groups at 200yds easy. Only advantage to the accubonds is that they are cheaper.

Where I am at they aren't any cheaper.

Accubonds are $21.50/box - so $43.00
Sciroccos are $42.99/box

That is .01 cheaper for the Swifts. It just seems like they are cheaper because you only have to buy them in 50's.

quote:

Originally posted by 30378:
The 30 cal 180gr Sciroccos are like lazers out of my 30-378 Weatherby. Get 1" groups at 200yds easy. Only advantage to the accubonds is that they are cheaper.

And that they shoot better, and retain more weight on average!

Here are some images of a Scirocco recovered from an elk.







FYI - Bullet weighed 174 grains for 96.6% weight retention.

I have the same report as 30378. Out of my Sendero in 300 Ultra Mag the Scirocco's shot like laser beams. Accuracy is spot on with me being able to hold the 10 ring at 300 yards all day long.

I haven't tried the Sciroccos, but 160 gr Accubonds consistantly group MOA to 200 yds out of my 7mm Rem Mag. I used them in South Africa last July on 4 antelope. Complete pass through even at 250 yds on Red Hartebeast and Black Wildebeest. My PH kept remarking about the massive internal damage they did. Exit holes were no larger than an inch.

hey pegleg what powder does your 300RUM like with the scirrocos? I've tried H1000 and H4831sc so far liking the H1000 best.

OK, so in short, would we all agree that the Accubond is more accurate(usually) and a bit tougher??

Wolfgar

Actually the Scirocco will retain most of its weight and because of that and its opening quickly it has garnered a reputation for poor penetration because of its large frontal area paricularly with the hot 30's at close range. The Accubond may be a bonded bullet but it is supposed to loose about a third of its weight with the bullet fragments acting as shrapnel. There was a long thread last year about the Accubond which seemed to give it mixed reviews in the field. Depending on the individual rifle I have had stellar accuracy with both bullets.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
Now if Nosler would just introduce a 6.5mm Accubond...

I'd like to see a 6.5mm Nosler Accubond at 130gr.

the 120's are too short to load out long enough for best accuracy in my long throated swede and the 140's are heavier
than what I really need for whitetails....
Not to mention that 130's would probably go just a touch faster than the 140's

I always like the Hornady 129's for their shape length and velocity, I am not a fan of their construction now if Hornady would make a 129gr 6.5mm interbond I'd try them...

I'm still waiting for a 30cal 165gr Accubond as well..

AllanD

look here

The SciroccoII might be just the ticket.

They claim redesign to improve accuracy and metalurgy.

I've not tried them.....but for those that want a 130 grain .264 bonded bullet.....walla

quote:

Originally posted by recoil junky:
hey pegleg what powder does your 300RUM like with the scirrocos? I've tried H1000 and H4831sc so far liking the H1000 best.

recoil- Sorry for the delay, I've been off hunting coyotes. My Sendero likes RL-22. It's a pretty hot load but with RL-22 you don't crush any of the powder column in the case with the bullet sitting right on top of the powder column. The other powders I tried were Retumbo,RL-25, H1000, H-870. With all these powders I was crushing the powder column when I was seating the bullets.

My son's .300 Ultramag hated Sciroccos; my cousin's .300 Win Mag loves them. Seating was critical, more like Barnes X bullets. No problem on elk taken with them.

quote:

Originally posted by Wolfgar:
OK, so in short, would we all agree that the Accubond is more accurate(usually) and a bit tougher??

No. I would agree that the Scirocco is the tougher of the two, but the accubond is probably easier to get to shoot in most rifles.

With that said, my .300 Win Mag shoots the scirocco better than the accubond with the loads I have worked up for each.

Like others I have been unable to get Sciroccos to shoot in any rifle I have tried them in. Not quite as bad as the old Barnes X but almost. As for Accubonds they seem to shoot like Ballistic Tips which is to say great.I would take tha Accubond over the Scirocco any day.