Disappointed with Swift Bullets

[pyroducksx3]

After careful consideration of many bullets I decided on the swift scirocco bullets for my 7 rem mag reloading. I was impressed with the reports on game and balance of BC and performance. Today I started sorting them and I'm already thinking this was a mistake. Out of 100 bullets only 43 passes the bearing surface and weight sorting. First I sorted by bearing surface and took everything from .516-.514, 41 bullets failed this test (maybe 6 or so were really close the others as much as .520 or .512). Then I weighed them and took everything from 150.1-149.9, 15 bullets failed this test although it was much closer with 3 or so being 150.2 a few at 149.8 and the rest at 149.7. One bullet I used making a dummy round and never measured. I don't think I was being too strict on my sorting, I followed the steps on reloading for longrange hunting. So this works out to over 1.00$ per bullet. Did I just get a bad batch of swift bullets? I originally had crossed Berger of the list because of mixed reviews of bullet performance but I have always heard that their tolerances are very good. I haven't even shot these swifts yet but even if they shoot well at the price per bullet I could get some CE or other custom bullets. I'm thinking of picking up a box of bergers or accubonds, any thoughts about Berger or accubond tolerances or why these swifts were so bad?

 

[pyroducksx3]

I bought some 140 gr bergers nag 28 failed, more than I thought would but much better than the swifts. Only 3 bullets failed the weight test with all others failing the bearing surface test

 

[jsthntn247]

I thought about trying the 150 scirocco's myself. If you decide not to try and shoot them I would be glad to take them off your hands and see if they will shoot. Although your variance test are a little disheartening.

 

[noneck180]

I would shoot them then say your disappointed..if you never prepped them first you may not even notice a difference.

 

[J E Custom]

After careful consideration of many bullets I decided on the swift scirocco bullets for my 7 rem mag reloading. I was impressed with the reports on game and balance of BC and performance. Today I started sorting them and I'm already thinking this was a mistake. Out of 100 bullets only 43 passes the bearing surface and weight sorting. First I sorted by bearing surface and took everything from .516-.514, 41 bullets failed this test (maybe 6 or so were really close the others as much as .520 or .512). Then I weighed them and took everything from 150.1-149.9, 15 bullets failed this test although it was much closer with 3 or so being 150.2 a few at 149.8 and the rest at 149.7. One bullet I used making a dummy round and never measured. I don't think I was being too strict on my sorting, I followed the steps on reloading for longrange hunting. So this works out to over 1.00$ per bullet. Did I just get a bad batch of swift bullets? I originally had crossed Berger of the list because of mixed reviews of bullet performance but I have always heard that their tolerances are very good. I haven't even shot these swifts yet but even if they shoot well at the price per bullet I could get some CE or other custom bullets. I'm thinking of picking up a box of bergers or accubonds, any thoughts about Berger or accubond tolerances or why these swifts were so bad?

It would be a very good experiment to test all of the most popular bullets to See how they stack
up against each other using your techniques.

Even though it is not a hunting bullet the Sierra match king would be a good one to test also.

I have had good luck with the Accubond and have weighed and sized them and found them to
be very good, But when comparing them to other bullets I dont have a good comparison and
to be apples to apples a test should be performed by 1 person to avoid differences in
test procedures and equipment.

If you do test other bullets please post the results for all of us.

Thanks
J E CUSTOM

 

[pyroducksx3]

I tested some nosler ballistic tips in .308 150 gr and had 13 fail out of a 50ct box so I guess that's about a 74% pass rate. These were all closer than the swift though in the bearing surface test. There wasn't but a couple that were way off with most just missing but a thousanth or two. Sorting the bullets this way is what was recommend on shawns video and I believe trebark, although I think I read trebarks threads about reloading on snipershide. I assumed this is how most of the longrange hunters do it. Funny note I sorted the bullets just out of practice for my dads 300 savage in his model 99. I got ES of 18 and it shot a .6" 3 shoot group at 100 yards. The gun I'm really trying to get dialed in is my rem 700 in 7 mag and best so far is ES of 28 and a group of .647" at 100. The savage isnt doing too bad for a 50+ ur old lever gun

 

[Hntbambi]

I use them as my 300 Wby Mag loves the 180 gr Scorocco II. I just loaded up 100 of them so I will be set for the next decade or so with this hunting gun.

 

[FAL Shot]

At 150 grains, you can be plus or minus .2 grains at least and never see any real difference under field conditions. I had more weight variation with 75 grain Scirocco bullets than you got with 150 grain bullets and my bullets shoot just fine, 0.6 MOA at 200 yards. Plus or minus .1 grain on a 150 grain bullet is too tight a tolerance to sell at a reasonable price and not necessary for 99.99% of practical hunting appications.

 

[pyroducksx3]

Well even though I was dissapointed with how the swifts sorted I think I'm going to run them this year. I was testing these (since I already had some sorted) and bergers. I got the 150 swifts to higher velocity than the 140 bergers and was able to get a load that shot .66" at 100 yards with an ES of 6, hard to pass that up and bear season starts in aug. Final load is 68.5 gr of H1000 using 150 swift scirocco II .010 of the lands in RWS brass, velocity is 2962-2956. Max load was 70 gr velocity at 3044 with an ES of 7 but grouping wasnt great (over 1"). I'm sure I could play with seating depth and shrink this down but with hunting season closing in I'm ready to get off the range and start shooting in the field, so it just isn't worth the 80-90 fps for me to play with it. I'm ready to get out and stretch the distance, I think time will be better served in the field instead of the range chasing the extra velocity

 

[pyroducksx3]

So I got another box of 100 ct swifts and Im very dissapointed again. I had more pass this time I think I ended up between 55-60% passing but I found out something more troubling. In the last group I sorted the largest group of bearing surface that passed was .514-.516. In this box that group was.530-.532, this is a big difference from box to box I would think, Right? I mean if I wanted consistancy I would expect to get close from box to box, I would think. I'm going to buy a couple 160 gr nosler AB I think and see how they are box to box. Is this inconsistency normal, or does swift have QC issues?

 

[fmajor]

Thx pyrodux - please post your findings w/the AB's.

I was thinking/hoping the Swift bullets (specifically the Sirocco's) were *premium* - maybe premium in terminal ballistics, but not in QC?

 

[SLOAN]

Buy berger 180 vld an don"t look back,Besafe work up. Sloan....gun)