I was trying to explain to a fellow today that the Scirocco II was an improved version of that bullet, but I forget what the problem was with the original. Was it an accuracy issue and whatever it was, what was done structurally to change it?

I think some of the 1's were coming apart or losing to much weight. Im sure someone else may be able to give you more accurate information.

The NEXT GENERATION Scirocco II, with the Signature Black Tip™, has exactly the same profile, both inside and out. All load data and bullet specifications remain the same as the original. It is a superbly accurate and sleek hunting bullet designed for long-range efficiency. It carries velocity and energy downrange better than any previous hunting bullet while producing the flattest trajectory due to its high ballistic coefficient. A perfect match for long-range cartridges, the Scirocco II produces positive expansion at minimal velocity. The bonded core Scirocco II retains upward of 80 percent of its weight.

This is the add that swift has now for the new bullet. In my neck of the woods the major complaint I have heard is that Scirocco 1 would not expand properly and some would go straight through without expanding at all. My own experience this past hunting season was this: My hunting partner shot two times at a 5 point bull moose with his .300 Win using Scirocco 1. He hit that moose twice and it did not seem have any effect on the moose. I took a shot with my 300 rum using a Nosler partition and the moose went down. On inspection of the moose the Scirocco 1 had gone straight through with a small hole in and a small hole out compared to the Nosler which had a small hole in and a large hole out with a huge wound channel. Personally I will stick to what works all the time Nosler. Just my opinion.

The II's have a bonded core, thats the only difference. I'm not rich enough to shoot Swifts, so I stick with the Noslers also.

The II's have a bonded core, thats the only difference. I'm not rich enough to shoot Swifts, so I stick with the Noslers also.

The I's also had a bonded core as does everything Swift makes. I've shot them into the same group by using some of each with the same load. The difference must be terminal performance.