Note, as to the spring ring extractor in the 700, it's the same as my M722 which is 50 years old and never had a problem, still puttin' 'em into 3/4" at 100 yards. As to comparing Savage guns BETTER quality, oh, paaalleeeeease...
There is no Savage I've ever handled that was as smooth a bolt or as good a trigger as a 700. You have to ADJUST the trigger, but the 700's adjustable trigger is so much better than the older Savage trigger, it's just no comparison. The Savage is adequate for hunting, though. I got mine down to about 3 lbs, where I like it, but it would NOT go any lower. The Remingtons can measure in ounces if you're a bench rest shooter. The 700's bolt's feel is like gliding on bearings. The Savage 110's bolt feels like it's draggin' on sand paper. It still works, but it's not as refined. The bolt is designed to be cheaply manufactured as a primary virtue, same for the rest of the rifle. That's why it's got that gawd awful barrel nut, ease of machining/setting head space. That does make it easier to swap barrels on even if it's an eye sore, I guess.
I ain't sayin' the Savage don't work, but there's just no comparison for me in quality of design and build compared to a M700. I've not had the feeding problems with the Remingtons that I have with that Savage either. It feeds fine so long as you don't try to load a round in the chamber with a full magazine. If you do that, that first round is going to nose dive into the magazine every time and I've heard similar complaints about 110s. Maybe they've gotten better since I bought mine about 15 years ago, but it's not of the quality of the Remington IMHO.
Some folks have a thing for controlled round feeding, something the 700 lacks, but I've never had a feeding problem with a Remington rifle. I fail to see the advantage. I don't hunt in Africa. Many quote the dangerous game thing, "positive feeding", but if it works, it works, and Remingtons work.