Swift Scirocco VS Nosler Accubond & Elk

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by 270fan, Jul 27, 2008.

  1. 270fan

    270fan Active Member

    Jan 11, 2007
    Son in law is getting ready for a NM Elk hunt the end of Oct. He has been reolading a number of 180 grain 300 WM bullets and testing them. Several have commented that the performance of the Accubond has not been consistent .... that they come apart too easily in the large animals. Neither he nor I have large animal field experience with any of them yet. He would love to have input and comments as well as experiences of board members who have used some of the 300 WM bullets on large animals. How does the Scirocco and Accubond perform. Which would you perfer and why? Any other comments on the subject? Thanks for any and all input
  2. canderson

    canderson Well-Known Member

    Mar 6, 2008
    The only experience that I have is with the scirocco. I shot a 250# whitetail last year a 75 yards with the 180 gr out the a 30-378. The bullet seemed to perform well, breaking both shoulders and exiting the body. I assume that the bullet held together because I did not any extra exit holes or other evidence of a failure.

  3. jmden

    jmden Well-Known Member

    Nov 2, 2003

    Several years ago I talked to Bill Hober (president of Swift) and asked about using the Scirocco on elk. As I recall, his response was that an elk was the largest animal it should be used on and the feeling was that it really wasn't built for elk, but smaller critters. At longer ranges where it's slowed down a bit, it might be a better choice. I haven't shot the Scirocco, but my general understanding is that the Accubond will tend to hold together better. There is now the Scirocco II, I believe, and this redesigned bullet sounds like it may perform better on larger game than it's predecessor. Call Bill and ask him. Probably the better choice out of a factory 300 WM would be the 200 Accubond (AB) for elk. That should hold together better and hit with more authority if the powder is well matched to the bullet and rifle than either of the 180's mentioned. Good luck!
  4. winmagman

    winmagman Well-Known Member

    Mar 13, 2003

    I have not shot the Scirocco in the WM, but have and still do use the 200 gr AB. Of the half dozen or so I've recovered they all performed as advertised, 60%-70% weight retention, perfect little mushrooms. I have not been fortunate enough to run any through an elk, but have put them through both front shoulders of some good sized whitetails (175lbs-225lbs) always get good results.

    The Scirocco experience I do have is with the 6.5mm 130 gr Scirocco II, not the original. I've used it and the 130 gr AB out of a 6.5 wssm (.260ish velocities). I found the Scirocco II a little harder to get to shoot accurately but it seems to be a tougher bullet construction wise. I've only recovered 2 Sciroccos, but both retained over 85% of their original weight, both were spine shots. The one 130 gr AB I've recovered performed just like its big brother in the WM 60-70% weight retention.

    I know its not exactly what you asked for, but hopefully its a little more food for thought.

  5. remingtonman_25_06

    remingtonman_25_06 Well-Known Member

    Jun 4, 2003
    I 2nd the 200g AB. Will offer you a lot more then the 180g like more penetration and a bigger hole, with added knockdown power! I killed a few spike elk and cows with them out of my 300 RUM and all exited and performed flawlessly from 75-525 yards. Weight retention in wet newspaper was usually 65%. Sorry, I never did find a bullet in an animal, I figure there still flying around somewhere.

    Every report I've seen and read says the scirocco will hold up better then the AB. I have no experience with the scirocco as they are way to expensive for me for as much shooting as I like to do. I like to practice with the bullet I use to hunt to better familiarize myself with the rifle/load. It always cracks me up when people say to practice with a cheaper bullet then when you go hunting, use the more expensive one. Well did you practice with those expensive ones all year long and know what there going to do at certain range and winds?? If you did great, if not I dont advise it.

    I would pick the bullet that shoots best out of his rifle and be totally happy. I guarantee both 180g bullets will slam any elk that walks.
  6. grit

    grit Well-Known Member

    Mar 23, 2005
    I have undying faith in Accubonds. They flat do what they say they will. My hunting partner shoots Scirrocos in is 300 ultramag. They seem good bullets. They DO come apart at close range at ultramag velocities. They still penetrate and the animal still falls over. I think you'll have to look long and hard to find the difference in terminal perfomance between
    these two. Which is easier to get, cheaper, and most importantly the most accurate? That's how I'd pick.
  7. cross

    cross Well-Known Member

    May 30, 2007
    Whichever shoots the best is the best one to use. You're using a 300 Winchester with 180s so you're going fast but not super fast and either of these bullets will smash through an elk like a freight train. We've been killing elk and deer and caribou with Sciroccos and Scirocco IIs for years and haven't seen one come apart yet (~20 to 30 critters) although many times they pass through. I've no doubt that the Accubonds will perform exactly the same way. I've had Sciroccos mushroom nicely and penetrate through an elk at 750 yds out of a 7WSM and my buddy smashed through both front shoulders of a big bull at 40 yards with a 300 WM.

    As for Sciroccos being expensive, they cost about $0.05 per bullet more than Accubonds. A box is much more expensive but Sciroccos are packaged in boxes of 100. So when you see a box costs $52, that's $0.52 per bullet compared to Accubonds costing $23 per box, that's only for 50 so they're $0.46 per bullet.

    Anyway, you've chosen 2 of the best. You can't go wrong with either of them.
  8. sjadventures

    sjadventures Well-Known Member

    Dec 9, 2007
    Call Bill Hober and if you don't reach him at first I promise you he will call you back. He is a great guy and loves to talk bullets. He absolutely knows bullets and everything there is to know about their Scirocco II.
  9. davewilson

    davewilson Well-Known Member

    Feb 19, 2004
    just get the 168TTXS and put the smack down!
  10. Derek M.

    Derek M. Well-Known Member

    Jul 12, 2004
    I've killed several black bears with the ABs and Sciroccos. I have never recovered a Scirocco. I did recover a 225 AB from a 338 WM on a close up bear shot at 12 yards. I wouldn't hesitate to use either.

    My 300 RUM loves the 180 Scirocco with H1000, Retumbo, and Re25. It loves the 200 AB with Re25 and Retumbo. I killed several bears with shoulder shots at close range with the 180 Scirocco.

    Here is my observation on bullet accuracy: 180 Scirocco produced best consistent groups but took twice as long to achieve. ABs produced accurate load with ease, but not as repeatable for unkown reasons.
  11. GlennRMK

    GlennRMK Active Member

    Jul 27, 2008
    I had a Weatherby Vanguard in .300 WSM and I couldn't get it to shoot 180 Accubonds, while I could get SSTs and Interbonds to shoot .75".

    I now have a Model 700 CDL stainless fluted with an HS Precision stock in .300 WSM. It would not shoot the 180 Accubonds either. I have tried the 200 grain Accubonds and I have only found a light load of RL19 that shoots. Got a 1/2" group. The rest of the 200s and 180s have been in the 1.5" group range.

    I have been shooting the 180 Scirroccos quite a bit and have found about 3 different loads in the .5-.75" group size.

    On the other hand I have been trying scirroccos in my buddys .300 win mag that I have been loading and they don't shoot at all. However the rifle is a Tikka T3 with a ton of free bore(about .250" between bullet and lands when seated as long as I can go in the magazine were my Remington has about .080"). It really likes the SSTs and I plan on trying Interbonds.

    You might want to look into the Interbonds. I really like them.