From my experience with both, the Savage 100 is superior. The Remington 710 feels cheap, not solid. The bolt is gritty and stiff at first but does smooth out a bit with use.
As an overall experience, I think that most would be happier with the Savage package.
Remember also that the 710 has a pressed in barrel that supposedly is not rebarrelable. Because of this it will have an extrememly low resale value. It was basically designed for the once a year hunter that does not shoot much and that is looking for a low priced rifle.
The strange thing is that you can still buy a synthetic stocked basic grade Rem model 700 for about the same price. I really see no need for the newer Remington since the older once is so superior. If course the factory probably makes way more profit on the newer model 710 than the older model 700.
I would choose either the Rem. 700 econo grade or the Savage 110. Both are superior weapons to the 710.
I'm prejudiced. My first gun was a Savage and I just got a 110 last month. I think they are good solid rifles and their production process is very efficient, allowing them to produce more quality for the dollar.
In Remington's favor they make very good gun cleaning products.
Savage has come a long ways since their basic offering of the 110. They now have scout versions, heavy barreled sniper versions, short action versions, you name it they got it.
Quality control has also come a long way for the company. You can't beat em for their value.
I'd get the Savage, in fact, I did, in the form of a 10FP heavy barreled model. I just replaced the stock, put on a SS10x42 scope, and it shoots like a dream.