Get a box of Interbond 165 grs, see if you can get them to shoot - most likely you can. If they shoot, go hunting and be happy. If not try out the Scirocco.
- mike

I want a reliable bullet for 308win. Should i choose Interbond or Scirocco? 150grs or 165grs? I'am hunting red deer in Norway .Norwegian red deer is a bit smaller than elk. In my country Interbond is less expensive than Scirocco

They're both pretty reliable. I'd go with the one your rifle shoots best and the heaviest bullet. jorge

get a 180-grain roundnose

The 180 gr. Scirocco I saw kill an elk class critter out of a 30'06 AI peeled it's way back to the last 1/3 of the jacket. They seem to be pretty soft. The 165 gr. bullets JJHack used in his '06 on a really big elk worked fine. He also saw lots of them used on african game. They are now his favorite bullet. His previous favorite were the much more expensive Swift-A-Frames. Quite a testimonial.
All this has led me to stop using the 168 gr. XLC Barnes in my .308 in favor of the 150 gr. Interbond. I can push them faster, they should open quicker and should penetrate at any angle just fine for the 200-300 lb. deer I hunt. For elk, I would use the 165's or go back to the 168 gr. XLC's. E

The reindeer I shot last year (40kg.. i Rondane) with my 7RM and 154gr Interbond neither dropped particularly fast nor looked very good shot at about 40 yards or so. The bullet looked like a blob of chewing gum. Personally I�d go for something that expands a little slower. Accubond maybe? Or Partition/x-bullet, may not be in vogue, but still better than most..

Tron

I'd likely shoot 165s myself in the .308 Win., and I'd simply choose, as Jorge stated, the bullet that produced the best accuracy in my rifle. Accuracy being equal or better, I'd prefer the original Nosler Partition to anything else.

AD

Perhaps a 154 grain Interbond from a 7mm Rem Mag at 40 yards is a poor comparison to the answer of the original question of a 165 grain Interbond from a 308 Win at any hunting range. It could be that you had one of the original lots of Interbonds, they were subsequently made with a thicker jacket. https://www.hornady.com/shop/Bullets_InterBond_popup.htm


154 grain Interbond at 2950 fps from a 280 Rem AI, 100 yard shot, complete pass through, animal dropped, flipping end for end at the shot and never moved.

E, I have heard you state many times how this or that bullet worked on elk class critters. I was just wondering exactly what kind of critters these were? Inquiring minds want to know.

Out of a .308 Win either should be fine. As stated before, use the one that shoots the best. I would be reluctant, however, to use the Scirocco in anything bigger than a .30-06. In my .300 Weatherby the 180 gr. Scirocco opened up all the way back to the base of the bullet after striking whitetail deer at rather close range. Way too much expansion for my liking.

I hate the Scirocco, and my opinion is not very high on the interbond either.

The Scirocco is the 2nd to the right. Notice how the bullet almost completely turned itself inside out. I don't have any pictures of the interbond, but they tend to pancake on inpact. As far as the plastic tip bullets go, I would recommend the Accubond, show as the middle bullet in the picture above.
My favorite is the Failsafe bullet, shown on each end. The far right bullet I pulled out of a 6x6 Bull Elk. It lost less than 1 grain of weight. Thats what I call performance.
Note. The second to the left is a partition, also a good choice.

were the partition and accubond recovered from game? What weights and caliber are they? Thanks OF

Old Fart, I agree. In 2001 I shot a decent mule deer in the lungs broadside at 150 yards. I was using the 150 grain Scirroco in my 7mm Mag. The bullet I recovered looked like your test scirroco except it was in 3 pieces. The bullet abolutely grenaded and all I hit was a rib. I would think a 150 grain bullet should at least give me a pass through shot at 150 yards when hitting the lungs broadside. It was a textbook shot and although it did kill the deer, I will not use them again. If it had been a shoulder shot on an elk, I might still be tracking the darn thing. I am however, anxious to try the accubond. I have heard very good things and they shoot really well out of my 338 RUM.

Cheers,

Autumn Pulse

In defense of the Hornady Interbond:



Interbond in Africa



Interbond in Africa



Non-African game bullet performance



Interbond on elk



Interbond on tough game



Some repeated stories, but all the right details. I think performance on game is more important than someone's impression that they pancake, what ever the problem with that is if you are getting thorough penetration.







In all that I've read of hunter's and shooter's experiences, with comparable bullets, the Interlocks are penetrating better and retaining more weight than the Accubonds.

In the picture, the bullet one the far left and far right are hardly "performers," they barely expanded at all. They probably did very little internal damage. A FMJ would have been about as effective as those two.

Now, That Scirroco and Accubond look like they had one hell of a Performance. They probably put the game down quickly and ethically.

Nice Photos.

Good Luck!

Reloader

Reloader, in defense of the FailSafe bullets, I must say that although they look like they don't expand to a very large diameter, I have had excellent results from equivalent bullets (in my case Barnes X) on both heavy and light skinned game. I think that when you start looking at wound cavities, the deep penetration bullets (X and FailSafe) actually perform a whole bunch better than you would think from mere expanded bullet appearance. No, these bullets are not my first choice for my everyday hunting of thin skinned game, but if you need something to take both heavy and thin skinned game, nothing much better than these bullets.

Just one man's opinion - mike

Ever seen the results of these different bullets in test gelitan? Yes the monolithics penetrate considerably farther, but the amount of havoc they wreak on the way is considerably less than that of a lead core bullet. You can have your bullets energy expended inside the animal or on whatever is on the other side of the animal, but there are no free lunches in physics.. Like mentioned above, if deep penetration were the end-all of bullet performance then expanding bullets wouldnt even exist. As long as there is not core seperation and you get an exit wound, then give me a pancaked bullet over a penciled wound channel every time. Partitions are perhaps the closest one can get to having the best of both worlds.





Old fart,



The thread is about bullet performance from a 308, but I'd be willing to wager that your bullet samples were not shot from a 308. ??

Looks ok to me. How much did it weigh?

Looks like alot of the lead is still bonded to the jacket on the Scirroco and the Accubond. If the Scirrocos weren't so exspensive, I believe they would be much more popular.

I think I am going to try the Interbonds in some hot magnum loads and see how they fare.

Reloader

First, some information about these bullets. Going from left to right, these bullets are a 160 Failsafe and a 140 partition both fired from a 7mm STW. The accubond is a 200 grain fired from a 300 WBY. The scirocco is a 150 from a 7mm mag. All of these were fired into milk jugs of water at approaching max velocities from there respective rifles. The final is a 140 gr failsafe fired from a 7mm mag and into the Elk at about 450 yards.

Second let me define what I consider good bullet performance. My goal is complete penetration (I prefer a hole on each end) in Elk sized game at ranges from 20 to 500 yards. I also want decent expansion, likely 1.5 to 2 times the bullets original diameter. In order to accomplish this, the bullet must not only expand, but it must retain its weight. Although the failsafe will lose its petals at extreme velocity, it will usually perform as I specified above. I was actually surprised to find the bullet in the Elk, but I was pleased with its performance.

As far as the scirocco, the bullet does tend to blow up. This may be OK on a gut or neck shot, but it will have problems busting bone. I believe the bullet retained only 54% of its weight in the example above (I will verify this in a couple of weeks).

With the interbond, in all honesty, the results I looked at were with the bullet when they first came out. They may have changed the bullet since then. Reloader, I will be interested in your results, expecially if you fire them in milk jugs of water.

Well, no wonder! If those bullets were recovered from game animals then I'd be concerned. But shooting into water is a torture test and in no way reflects how a bullet will perform on game. Many bullets that turn inside out when shot into water will perform adequately on game. Including the Scirroco when properly applied. I've presented evidence that the Hornady Interbond is a good performer on game animals, not water-filled milk jugs. I think most know what counts for more.

I agree, impacting water jugs at high speed is no real look into how it will perform on ribs and lung.

I can't count how many times I've seen a picture of a recovered Scirroco that looks like a recovered Game King or BTip. Why soooo much money for these bullets? They sell for more than the A-Frame for F sakes!



Interbond comes in 100 counts so for your money you can do more playing around to find that load you are comfortable with.



In my opinion, Scirocco is a deer class bullet. If you can't get the Interbond to perform to your liking, try Accubond. Of course there is other great choices but it seems you are focussing on the tipped bonded bullets.

I'll grant you that impacting water at high speeds is a torture test, but so is trying to bust bone at those same velocities. I actually take game recovered bullets with a grain of salt, because they will behave differently depending on the path the bullet took (gut shot or busting through a shoulder, the bullet will perform differently).
The water test is a excellent test because it provide the consistency to compare bullets. The really good bullet designs will shine in the water test.
As I said before, I expect my bullets to perform at ranges from 20 to 500 yards, plus I expect expansion in soft tissue and penetration if it is busting through bone. Only a handfull of bullet will meet that criteria. The scirocco is a big failure, and I'm still not convinced the interbond will meet those expectations.

Good posts guys. I trying to decide which bullet to Namibia for my 7mm RemMag for Zebra,Kudu,Hog,Springbuck,R-Hartebeest and hopefully leopard. I have it down to the 160gr TSX, or the 160gr Accubond, both shoot best from my rifle. What do you think? Wolf

Dang, you have me green with envy. My first choice would be the TSX. I would also highly recommend the failsafe, assuming they shoot OK in your rifle. Good luck.

For a .308 Winchester I believe either bullet will do a superb job. I shot the 180 grain Scirocco out of my .300 Winchester at elk, and although the elk are dead I have switched to the accubond as I did not like how much the Scirocco expanded at magnum velocities, but at .308 Win velocities I don't think you will have any problems with either one of the choices.