Changing a barrel makes it a frankenrifle? Egads, then every man what changed a barrel, or paid to have one changed, on this forum owns nothing more than a frankenrifle?
The receiver is homely? It's a tubular steel receiver...just like the Remington. The front ring is, well, round. The rear is, well, round. You wish the bolt stuck out more in the back? The nut is just a feature of the rifle, one that allows for more consistent chambering than a Remington has, but also allows the owner to rebarrel at home. It also allows the owner to fine-tune headspace to tailor a certain load to the rifle. These are things not easily done on the Remington, indeed not practical even to pay for in the case of the latter.
Bedding is identical when it comes to either action. The Savage trigger can more safely be adjusted down. If you want a short action, you can get one.
Also, the sea of homely basic Savages does not affect the truth that you can get a nice one without any trouble. All it really does is run the risk of offending the aesthetics of a casual observer not inclined to purchase one. The man who wants a nicely-finished version merely has to select a nice one - it's not hard.
Bush, you prefer the Remington. Great. It is a fine action with many followers and a huge amount of aftermarket support. Some of the best sniper rifles were based on its action in the past. You'd have many good reasons to pick a Remington.
There are many good reasons to pick a Savage, too, and it really boils down, as these kinds of things often do, to a Ford or Chevy preference. As a man who has owned them both, the reality has always been the C1500, regardless of flavor, is equal to the F150.
I prefer Mossberg centerfire rifles from the 1960's and 1970's. My choices, the 800 and 810 (plus their derivatives) is not the common one at all, and my Mossberg has the same barrel/shoulder design as your Remington. I don't actually own a barrel-nut rifle - though I have owned two Savages in the past. I like the four locking lugs, sliding safety, blued finish with iron sights, hinged floorplate, and walnut stock you get with most Mossberg. The fact that Mossberg only made these models for 15 years or so had nothing to do with their quality - they are outstanding rifles and better than a Savage in my opinion - but they were pushed by a shotgun manufacturer that lacked the centerfire rep of Winchester, Remington, Savage, or Interarms. Even so, I'm happy with mine. I prefer mine. I consider mine a better, stronger design than either a Remington or a Savage. All mine have either Redfield or Burris mounts from the 70's, Leupold rings, and either Nikon Monarch or Burris Fullfield II scopes.
Yet I can see the qualities of either the Savage or Remington at the same time. A man cannot possibly go wrong with either a Remington or a Savage. The argument is better spent on what glass to purchase.
Frankly, considering the Savage is cheaper, I recommend the Savage and take the money saved and invest that directly into good glass as that will actually be more important. The extra $80-$150 you invest into glass - and so keeping the prices the same between the rifles - means you will end up with a better shooting combination with the Savage.