I have a 300 Weatherby and when sighting it in I used the 180 gr Scirocco. My final 3 shot group ended up at .567" at 100 yards. I've had good luck with Nosler bullets in the past, but the 180 gr Accubond wasn't available when I sighted in my rifle. The Accubond has slightly better performance than the Scirocco from a FPS and energy standpoint. Just wanted to get everyone's thoughts on performance on game between these two bullets out to 500 yards (elk, moose, mule deer). Of course, I'll use whichever is more accurate, but if accuracy is equal would you lean towards one over the other? Thanks everyone!
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
180 Gr. Scirocco vs. Accubond
- Thread starter pedwards
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
gillettehunter
Well-Known Member
From the little that I've seen the Scirocco is a somewhat "softer" bullet. It seems to expand and fragment quicker than the Accubonds That is assuming you mean the regular AB's and not the long range ones. With the cartridge your using I'd probably lean towards the AB's. Either should work tho.
Bruce
Bruce
It is the regular AB. I don't reload, so it's all Weatherby factory ammo. I may also give the 170 gr Hammer a try.
I have 5 in that caliber! My favorite. First one was made in 1958 W. Germany, no brake. First day I got it shot 116 rounds. I was black and blue for a week
I've killed a couple elk with the 180 Scirocco out of a 300 win mag. This was before I got into reloading, they were Fiochi loaded ammo and the most accurate I could find for that rifle (0.5 MOA). I was very happy with the performance on game. I've also used the accubonds in other calibers and can't say I see much of a difference between the two. The Scirocco's will definitely get the job done. With Weatherby now offering Hammer bullets in their ammo, and your desire for 500 yards and in on elk, I would definitely be trying the Weatherby loaded Hammers.
It's my first .30 mag and I'm really happy with it. I highly recommend the Carbonmark rifle from Weatherby. I shoot maybe 10 rounds a year with my hunting rifles. The accuracy credit goes to the rifle.
Very helpful reply. Thank you!
Buckys
Well-Known Member
You may find this article of interest.
Ballistics Test: The Best Big Game Bullets - RifleShooter
Take a look at the bullets themselves and what we learned.
www.rifleshootermag.com
vancewalker007
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2013
- Messages
- 994
I've used both bullets in a 7mm STW and in a 300 WSM. From Coues deer to Elk I found the results more or less the same. All the shots were less than 400 yards. All game showed good penetration and proper wound cavity. Full grown Elk tend to absorb all bullets of all types. I have have a 1-2 complete pass throughs on them but you usually find the bullet somewhere in the off side shoulder. I'd say the 2 are are coin toss. I wish Swift would make a heavier 6.5 bullet.
What I have noticed with all the bonded bullets I have shot is they tend to loose accuracy out past 500-600 yards. I don't know the mechanical nature of this, I know some people say bonding processes can cause small voids inside bullets. All I know is they have all started flying worse and worse the farther they fly. Under 500 yards I've never noticed a difference between a bonded bullet that shot say 1 MOA@100 yards say versus a cup and core bullet of the same accuracy. But the farther out you go the cup and core bullets seem to hold their accuracy better.
Very helpful article. Thank you! Seems like I really can't go wrong with either. Just boils down to what shoots straighter out of my rifle.You may find this article of interest.
Ballistics Test: The Best Big Game Bullets - RifleShooter
Take a look at the bullets themselves and what we learned.
Thanks for the detailed reply. Based on your feedback regarding 500+ yard shots, I may have to give the 170gr Hammer bullets a try. I most likely won't be taking a shot beyond 500 yards, but my scope is easy to dial in at 600 yards, so it's definitely a possibility. Thanks again!
vancewalker007
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2013
- Messages
- 994
Well, you need to load some stuff up and go shoot paper or steel at long ranges to see what your setup does. It may hold accuracy for you without issues. I was talking about a really fine point of accuracy not necessarily usability. Good luck to you on your hunts.
hicountry1
Well-Known Member
One of my longest shots on game was with a 180 Scirocco out of my 300rum.
Mv was 3350, shot was 450 yards, on a nice 6x6 bull elk.
Absolutely perfect performance out of scirocco, perfect mushroom,, something out of a magazine. Dropped him in his tracks.
These were the original version. Newer ones are a bit harder, jacket wise.
I wouldn't hesitate to use either version out of a 300wby.
I also shoot the 165 Sciroccos out of my 300 win.
Mv was 3350, shot was 450 yards, on a nice 6x6 bull elk.
Absolutely perfect performance out of scirocco, perfect mushroom,, something out of a magazine. Dropped him in his tracks.
These were the original version. Newer ones are a bit harder, jacket wise.
I wouldn't hesitate to use either version out of a 300wby.
I also shoot the 165 Sciroccos out of my 300 win.
