In all the discussions about bullets and external and terminal ballistics i dont hear anyone talking about the scirocco. I have had pretty good luck with the 140 accubond in the 7 mm STW and i know a lot of you said the 160 accubond is the way to go but just curious has anyone tried the 150 scirocco?
150 Scirocco vs 160 accubond
- Thread starter Blacktail
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
150 Scirocco II
I've been using the 150 Scirocco IIs for several years out of my 7WSM and they're everything that they're supposed to be. I'm getting 3165 fps. Great accuracy, great expansion, and great weight retention and a very good BC. Last year I took (2) 6-point bulls with them, 1 at 750 yards and the other at about 100 yards. At 750 the bullet entered in front of the shoulder, passed through the chest cavity and was up against the hide on the far side. The bullet mushroomed nicely. At 100 yards, I put 3 of them through the chest cavity and they all burried in the hillside. Devastating wound channels. I don't understand why they're not more popular. People claim that they're pricey compared to Accubonds but a box of 50 Accubonds sells for about $23 and a box of 100 Sciroccos sells for about $53 so for the difference of about $7/100 or $0.07 ea I don't think that argument hold much water. If they shoot for you, I think you'll be happy with the flight ballistics and terminal performance.
I've been using the 150 Scirocco IIs for several years out of my 7WSM and they're everything that they're supposed to be. I'm getting 3165 fps. Great accuracy, great expansion, and great weight retention and a very good BC. Last year I took (2) 6-point bulls with them, 1 at 750 yards and the other at about 100 yards. At 750 the bullet entered in front of the shoulder, passed through the chest cavity and was up against the hide on the far side. The bullet mushroomed nicely. At 100 yards, I put 3 of them through the chest cavity and they all burried in the hillside. Devastating wound channels. I don't understand why they're not more popular. People claim that they're pricey compared to Accubonds but a box of 50 Accubonds sells for about $23 and a box of 100 Sciroccos sells for about $53 so for the difference of about $7/100 or $0.07 ea I don't think that argument hold much water. If they shoot for you, I think you'll be happy with the flight ballistics and terminal performance.
Thanks for the info. I have great accuracy with teh 140 accubonds but had a failure in alberta and makes me nervous. I know the powder will obviously be different since i have the STW and you wsm but did you find they like to be real close to the lands or .02 or so? Sorry for the questions just trying to take as much guess work out of this as i can. My range time has dwindled.
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/recovered-sciroccos-13287/
I like the 160 accubond better,. better BC and more accurate in my rifle.
I like the 160 accubond better,. better BC and more accurate in my rifle.
Point one is simply that Nosler makes outstanding products, they have been around much longer, and their bullets are just flat out accurate. But, Point Two: The Scirocco has a higher BC per same bullet weight, if I recall. The problem that haunts Swift Scirocco bullets is that they are pure lead/pure copper, thus it is a little more difficult to find the sweet spot in most rifles, IMO.
FWIW, I have used the 150 in my 7mag, with IMR 4350 with excellent accuracy. Also, I have used the 180 Scirocco in my 300 RUM with H1000, Retumbo, and Re25, all producing 3/4" groups or less.
I have killed 5 black bears now, with my 30.06 and the 180 Scirocco, 2 of which are on film. The closest one was 8 yards and it blew through both shoulders on a medium sized bear, at 260 pounds.
I've never been one who cares much about what a bullet looks like when I'm field dressing my kill. If I tag an animal, the bullet did it's job, so long as I hit where I was aiming. The Scirocco offers a nice combination of characteristics in a hunting bullet, in that it is bonded, has a good BC, is tough enough for bone, yet, opens up rapidly. I have yet to recover one Scirocco bullet, no matter the game, or distance. I intentionally aim for center mass of the scapula or slightly higher.
I was speaking with a tech man from "Best of the West" just yesterday and his primary bullet in his 300 RUM is the 190 VLD, and the 180 Scirocco is his secondary load. The Scirocco seems to be quite popular with the staff there, if that is meaningful to you.
I had a 140 grain .277 failure on a CO mulie in 2005 at 50 yards. Makes me nervous too.
The Sciroccos have always been bonded. I think Mr. Hober will clear that up. But, like Nosler and the Btip, the Scirocco went through changes with R&D. The Scirocco II looks the same, but they will not dislcose what is different about it v. its predecessor. What they would disclose is simply that there were changes in the process of fabricating the bullet. It is still bonded, same BC, same flight characteristics.
My opinion is that despite that it was bonded, the early Sciroccos had a tendency to open so violently that they looked like pancakes, with excellent frontal diameter, but perhaps a significant loss of penetration.
My opinion is that despite that it was bonded, the early Sciroccos had a tendency to open so violently that they looked like pancakes, with excellent frontal diameter, but perhaps a significant loss of penetration.
Ridge Runner
Well-Known Member
BLACKTAIL, Tell us about the failure? I shoot accubonds for the higher BC, and have heard alot of negative results with the scirrocco II, nothing on expansion/penatration but about accuracy, Folks who shot the original scirrocco can't get near the same accuracy with the scirrocco II.
RR
RR
Shot about a 340 mulie buck at 340 yards through the boiler room and flattened him with the 140's he got back up then piled up. Insides were mush. Then a few days later took about a 300 shot at a whitetail and he went down got back up and ran ran at me before turning and running away. Did the whole arse shot at about 120 or so striking him square in teh left ham. Bullet went in about 3" or so and didnt even break the bone. Had to shoot him again in the neck with my last bullet. It looked like someone took a baseball size chunk of meat out of the left hind quarter. The 140's are accurate out of my gun and they were pretty mild loads only going about 3200. Not sure what happened was thinking bout leaving th 140's for blacktails and antelope and stepping up to teh 160s for mule deer. I know a lot of guys say they work great.
Ridge Runner
Well-Known Member
Blacktail,
had the same thing happen, but my buck was passing blood out the nose/mouth when recovered. Only possible conclusion was the bullet hit a limb, and still made it to the lungs.
RR
had the same thing happen, but my buck was passing blood out the nose/mouth when recovered. Only possible conclusion was the bullet hit a limb, and still made it to the lungs.
RR
Pieces or what i could find anyway.
keithcandler
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 650
I've shot both.......
I shot the 150g first generation Scirrocos in my 7 Mag, with 3/4" accuracy with extreme terminal ballistics on deer.
I shoot the 140g Accubonds in my 7 Mag and my Custom 7 STW. I seat the bullets to touch the lands. Accuracy with these bullets are fantastic to say the least.
I get 4x the copper from the swift bullets compared to the NOsler.
FUnny thing, no one mentioned the Barnes Tripple Shock. These bullets are un-godly accurate and copper foul less than the nosler bullets.
I and my buddies have killed 40+ head of deer with the 140g Tripple socks in Rem and custom rifles in 7 Mag an 7 STW's. Massive damage on deer with complete penetration on any angle shot.
After shooting all 3 bullet designs, the Barnes Tripple shock is the one to beat.
I shot the 150g first generation Scirrocos in my 7 Mag, with 3/4" accuracy with extreme terminal ballistics on deer.
I shoot the 140g Accubonds in my 7 Mag and my Custom 7 STW. I seat the bullets to touch the lands. Accuracy with these bullets are fantastic to say the least.
I get 4x the copper from the swift bullets compared to the NOsler.
FUnny thing, no one mentioned the Barnes Tripple Shock. These bullets are un-godly accurate and copper foul less than the nosler bullets.
I and my buddies have killed 40+ head of deer with the 140g Tripple socks in Rem and custom rifles in 7 Mag an 7 STW's. Massive damage on deer with complete penetration on any angle shot.
After shooting all 3 bullet designs, the Barnes Tripple shock is the one to beat.
