It seems the consensus of the tactical crowd is that the heavy barrelled rifles are more consistent with regard to accuracy, precison, ruggedness, etc. I'm not really sure that a good sporter couln't keep up with one for the most part though. My thinking is that one needs a variety of Savage rifles.
One Savage set up like something the Marines or Carlos Hathcock would have used. Heavy Barrel, 3 pound trigger, rugged scope and mounts, wide forend and palmswell for added stability on bags, 12+ pounds, probably in .30 caliber of some sort.
Then you will need a Savage set up as a Varminter. Heavy barrel, .22 to .25 caliber, 10+ pounds, high magnification scope, beefier stock to ride the bags, and a super light trigger. (I like a lighter trigger on a varmint rifle than my tactical rig. I figure the nerves are cool enough when I sight on a squirrel that I won't touch one off accidentally. If the rifle was being used in a Military or LEO capacity, the nerves would probably be a bit too racy to go below 3 pounds on a trigger. Just speculation there...)
Also, you will need a Savage sporter for hunting. Those heavy barrelled rifles are a chore to lug around all day over hill and dale. This would be good in an intermediate caliber like .243, 7-08, 6.5x55, or .280, have a good medium magnification scope, 3 pound trigger, and would be nice to have backup iron sights.
Then, to pass those boring summer months, you will need a Savage rimfire rifle to rid the world of a few varmints and practice your field shooting.
I guess these ramblings weren't very scientific but thats been my line of thinking when I bought my four Savages. I would love to have Remingtons, and Tikkas, and CZs but I'm having such good luck with Savages. And with the low price I can afford to buy more of them. Savage #4, a Stevens 200 in .243 ($289), is going to get camo'd in AlumaHyde II. I would be way to chicken to do that to a beautiful Remington.