Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 7mm - 150 grain Scirocco or 160 grain Accubond

Assumptions:
7mm Remington Magnum - 26" barrel
Top velocity for respective bullets
Accuracy is adequate
Game is primarily elk, with moose, mule deer, antelope all being possibilities with this rifle

Ranges from 0 - 500 yards, with most shots at elk between 250 - 400 yards. The area we hunt usually lends itself to cross canyon shots for elk.

What bullet would you choose and why?

Thanks.

I have killed 3 elk with the 150 Scirocco started out at about 3120 FPS. All 3 were one shot kills at about 250,300, and just a hair over 400. I recovered 2 bullets, 1 that penetrated the off shoulder on a cow and one through the off side shoulder on a good 6X6 bull, both just under the skin. They worked perfectly in my mind and both retained at least 90% weight. They did a lot of damage internally and not a lot of meat damage.
I have no experience with the Accubond

7mm Rem Mag for some reason is the only caliber that I could get the Scirocco's to shoot in. As far as performance I never had a problem from Elk to hog. They also were the 150gr.

I went through this same dilemma a while back.

I went with the AB's and they shot incredibly well. I did have a bad experience with a AB blowing up on a muley's shoulder that had me looking for another bullet.

So I tried the SSII's, and they held up very well for me on 2 mule deer. They dont have as good of accuracy as the AB does (in my rifle) however.

Im going to give the AB's another try next season, but either way a guy goes here he cant go wrong.

I have used the 130 277 Sci's on about 25 head of african plains game. They are my first choice of all bullets tested ( TSX, A-frame, failsafe, accubond etc) BUT they are very difficult to get to shoot well. The 7mm 150 is much easier to get to work well. It would be my choice above all the others.
I sent some accubonds to a PH buddy and he asked me not to give him anymore. He would rather use any of the other "superpremiums". In fact he thinks the accubonds are no different than the ballistic tips.

I use the 210 SSII in my 338 RUM with good results. My buddy uses 160accbonds in his 7RM with similar results.

Not being smart, but what are the results.

If they go through the boiler room in either case the animal is dead. the 338 puts bigger holes in them. Penetration is similar. Elk have been shot from 40 yards to 370 yards. Most in the 250-300 range. As said on another thead, I have witnessed 14 of the 15 elk killed that we have shot in the last 4 years, 7 with the 7 and 7 with the 338 and basically no difference in killing ability. If hit squarely through the boiler room = dead elk quickly. I had a single lunged bull that required a second shot about 15 minutes later as he was still on his feet but not going anywhere. Broadside or quartering shots through the lungs with either gun and they normally run 20-100 yards, typically stumbling downhill, before exiring. I have dropped a couple with the 338, but most run a bit. I am suprised a bit at the lack of pass throughs with the 338. I know the bullet is on the light for caliber side, but it's still way more than I would think is needed for consistant pass throughs. I would say I have less pass through than do pass through. Keep in mind if we have a reasonable shot we take it, so quarter to and angle away shots are taken, so bullets go through lots of animal. The most impressive kill was my 338 on a raghorn 5pt at 315 yards. Quartering to me, impact on the point of the near shoulder, smashing it, passing through vitals and coming to rest in the paunch behind the diaphram after bruising the hide, but not exiting the gut. That bull crashed on it's face and thrashed around for about 10 seconds before expiring, but never getting to its feet. The rest have been pretty boring. Impact, short run, expired animal.

Exactly......note bullet placement. I have had the same things happen with 7 mag,300 mags,etc. Shots angled to bones and through vitals (coming/going, ie slightly quartering on or away)generally give these results IME.

yeah, who knows if a 7 would have done the same thing? every other shot that has been similar impact location has had similar results. I can say the 338 leaves larger wound channels. Actually noticeably larger. Not necessarily longer, but wider. But as the saying goes, dead is dead.

salmonhead....yes,the 338 will make a wider wound channel,which makes sense...but the 7mm makes one that is wide enough....these poor animals can only withstand so much abuse

I've got a box of the 150gr S2s I need to get loaded up for my 7saum. The 100gr S2 proved to be a great bullet, and I don't expect too much different from the 150gr.

Gd I hate when hunting season is over the rivers are blown.. The idea of a 7saum starts driving me crazy.. Just wish Win or Kimber made one..

Seems like you've been trying out the S2's alot... Are you getting them to shoot? Guess I shouldn't get involved in this thread as I don't own and haven't owned a 7mm mag.. But I hear the S2's are tough to get to shoot, Plus they are exspensive. The Accubond is basically a partition which is never a bad choice..

Calvin/Shaq: The S2 7mm 150 is a pretty accurate bullet....it was what I used in the 7mm Dakota.....