Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Firearms Forum > Reloading
 Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures >

Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

Reloading Share techniques for reloading, where to get the hottest in reloading equipment and learn how to reload from fellow hunters.

Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

Old 04-02-2004, 11:14 AM
  #1  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Power's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wenatchee, Wa (The Dry Side!)
Posts: 1,044
Default Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

Since so many are asking about these bullets I started a thread to discuss the merrits of each.All are bonded, ballistic-tipped, lead-core bullets but the jacket taper on each is different. The Scirocco is thin right near the tip and then pretty much thick the rest of the way down the side. The Accubond has a thinner jacked toward the nose and tapers to a thicker jacket toward the heel. I suspect you'll get better energy transfer with the Accubond but if you're after heavy game (big bear, elk, moose) something of a heavier bullet might be warranted. The Hornady Interbond looks very much like the Accubond so either would probably be a pretty good bullet for deer up to elk sized game.

Scirocco;


Accubond;



Hornady Interbond;


Personally I like the way the Accubond is designed and will be using it for everything this next year. I hunt deer, elk, and black bear and have used the Scirocco on deer but in my opinion it's too much for deer.

http://www.powerandfury.net/j02deer.html

Also found this site on bullet selection while finding pictures for this reply. Pretty good read;

http://www.shortmags.org/shortmags/r...tselection.htm
Power is offline  
Old 04-02-2004, 02:26 PM
  #2  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Western Nebraska
Posts: 3,392
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

The short mags article is superbly written and organized.....thanks a bunch
Vapodog is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 05:26 PM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: RIO RANCHO NEW MEXICO USA
Posts: 168
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

Power,

I'm not interested in the new shorty mags, but I do enjoy good information. Your article clearly comes under that qualifier. Thank you.
BigBob .30-06 is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 05:51 PM
  #4  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 6,471
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

They are all good designs but the Accubond I believe is the better bullet based on the Jacket material . I have heard and this is hearsay that the Interbond overexpands its bullet shank game and turns into a ball. How this affects penetration is anyones guess or maybe this source was wrong. I have a good friend in CO that has slayed a lot of Elk and Mulies using Swift Scirrocos out of a 300 win mag . He gets under an inch out of a Browning Abolt with that load.
oldelkhunter is offline  
Old 04-05-2004, 03:38 AM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: RIO RANCHO NEW MEXICO USA
Posts: 168
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

old elkhunter,

I did about three months worth of testing with the Interbond last fall. The bullets were the .308 150 and 165 grain bullets.. Accuracy from a .308 W and .30-06 were very impressive.

I started the test with three boxes of the 150 grain bullets. All 300 were weighed and measured. All 300 bullets fell within .7 of a grain in weight and .0002" in diameter. Try this with your favorite bullets sometime. The quality control was the best I've ever checked. The only other bullet that has been this consistent is the same bullet in a Nosler Ballistic Tip. Penetration test were made with the .308W. Muzzle velocity was 2775 fps. The bullets were fired int water soaked newspapers. Bullets were fired fromm 100 yd, 75 yd, 40 yd and twenty feet. Bullets were collected, weighed and measured. Depth of penetration was measured with a cleaning rod and a tape measure. All bullets expanded to a minimum of .674". Weight retention was a minimum of 86% for the 20' bullets to 92% for the 100 yd bullets. The 20' bullets expanded to .750", penetrated 15". All bullets looked like something Hornady would use in an advertisement. Beautiful mushrooms all. None of the bullets ended up looking like a ball.

Prior to the Interbond being released, I had been using Nosler Partitions. Expansion, penetration and weight retention of the Interbond surrpassed anything the Nosler's ever gave. Due to being lazy, I didn't get a chance to use them on game, but I hope to correct that this fall..

Now these were my test results and they are the only thing I have to go on. I don't want to get into a spitting contest, and it is not my intention to step on anyone. Good luck.
BigBob .30-06 is offline  
Old 04-05-2004, 09:58 AM
  #6  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Olive Branch MS USA
Posts: 1,032
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

I've used both the Accubond and Scirocco on whitetail deer and based on my limited experience so far, I prefer the Accubond. I've gotten complete penetration with it, whereas the Scirocco opens up so much that penetration is limited more as a result.
Solitary Man is offline  
Old 04-05-2004, 11:53 AM
  #7  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: RIO RANCHO NEW MEXICO USA
Posts: 168
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

Solitary Man,

I tested a box of scirocco bullets for weight and diameter and accuracy. They were the worst bullets I have ever tested. Diameter varied .0016" and weight was worse. The only thing worse than the weights was the accuracy. This is one make of bullet, based on what I tested, wouldn't even make a good fishing weight. Good luck.
BigBob .30-06 is offline  
Old 04-05-2004, 01:48 PM
  #8  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Olive Branch MS USA
Posts: 1,032
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

Well, I've got a few left over. I might have to try that fishing weight experiment.

Also, based on your report and those of others, I'm going to have to try those Interbonds soon.
Solitary Man is offline  
Old 04-05-2004, 09:59 PM
  #9  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chilliwack, BC,Canada
Posts: 43
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

personally i have not shot any of these. but i have heard rave reviews about the Accubond. and jim shockey shoots nosler so cant really be going wrong using the ammo that a guy that has completed the ultimate slam used
hunting_is_my_obsession is offline  
Old 04-06-2004, 08:25 AM
  #10  
bigcountry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default RE: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures

For some reason, I am getting alot of flyers out of the accubonds. I tested 200gr in my 300RUM. I measured for consistency, and all looks great. For another reason, I can't get those Scirroccos to shot better than 2MOA. And they build pressure like a barnes almost.

So all I can get to shoot out of my 300RUM is 190gr matchkings, 200gr matchkings, 180gr partitions, 180gr Tripleshocks. I guess that is all I will ever need.
 

Quick Reply: Accubond vs. Scirocco vs. Interbond with pictures


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.