I don't have any experience with the Savage rifle that you're looking at, but since you haven't gotten too many responses, I'll throw my .02 in.
Savage makes good rifles; but so does Remington. You'll find proponents of both and you'll also find those that hate one or the other.
With this model, it seems that Savage is trying to attract precision shooters because they are including a couple of the more sought after features, namely the 5r rifling and the 11.25 twist. 5r rifling is relatively new and was touted as having advantages over other forms of rifling due to the profile of the lands and the fact that no two lands directly oppose each other. The 11.25 twist is, again, a relatively new twist rate that was discovered to be fast enough to spin a 175gr bullet fast enough to stabilize it without over spinning it.
In practice, I've found both to be more marketing hype than anything else. Neither will turn a badly made barrel into a good barrel. A very good friend of mine just had a rifle built using a Rock 11.25 twist barrel. In fact, the only difference between his rifle and mine is the barrel and they both shoot the same. They both shoot very well. Mine has a Krieger 10 twist barrel. I wouldn't let the label on the rifling or the twist rate be a major deciding factor.
What you should look at is the overall package of each rifle. The pros and cons of each as I see it are:
Savage pros: Longer barrel will mean better velocity (usually), the fluting will offset some of the weight of the longer barrel, the trigger is probably going to be better than that of the Remington, the 11.25 twist is just fine for shooting projectiles up to 175gr. Due to Savage's barrel nut method of attaching the barrel to the receiver, it makes it pretty easy to swap barrels, if you choose to. If you decide, later on, that you want to give .243 a try, all it will take is a barrel swap, that you can do yourself with the proper tools and a barrel.
Savage cons: Longer barrel will make the rifle a bit less handy. Savage's barrel nut method of attaching the barrel limits the thickness of the barrel at the breech.
Remington pros: Shorter barrel makes the rifle a bit more handy (at the cost of some velocity, probably), 10 twist is just fine for bullet weights up to 175gr (and heavier if you choose to experiment). Lots and lots of aftermarket upgrades. If there's an upgrade that you want, odds are that someone makes it for a Remington 700.
Remington cons: The trigger is likely going to suck. I absolutely hate the X-Mark Pro trigger. It's adjustability is a joke. It's inconsistent and breaks like a carrot. I've seen a few SPS rifles with rust problems. I don't know what the deal is with the finish on the SPS Tacticals, but the two that I had needed a good bit of attention. I wound up duracoating both of them.
As far as the stocks go, I think they both suck, although they will get the job done. If I was to get either rifle, the first thing I'd do is get a better trigger, followed by a better stock. Whatever you get, remember that you still need to scope it.
My two SPS rifles in stock form shot very well and were able to consistently shoot into 1/2" at 100 yards with handloads. In my experience, Savage heavy barrel rifles have been able to do the same thing.
The choice really isn't about accuracy. Both rifles will likely have that. The choice should be more about which rifle will fill your needs better.
