I hate to get involved in a spitting contest but there are many statements being made on this subject that some clarification is due.
I belong to the camp that thinks a model 70 can, and will shoot as well as a Remington. However, it will cost more money to make one shoot as well because the set-up time for the machine work takes longer and requires more specialized fixtures. Rem 700, and clones, are easier for machinists to work on, and since time is money and the easier the set-up the quicker it can be done and the more money can be made. As someone mentioned earlier - the Rem 700 is the small block Chevy of the rifle world - there are tons of fixtures and accessories for them and anyone with a modicum of smithing ability can make them shoot reasonably well.
Rather than put forth arguments that are based on opinion I have excerpted a few items from Stuart Otteson's book, Bolt Action Rifles - A Design Analysis, Volume One
This is generally accepted as the definitive work on bolt action designs.
I doubt that reading this will sway anyone from one camp to the other and my intention is only to present fact rather than opinion or speculation. Unfortunaltely I could not paste the illustrations from the book.
I will leave you to draw your own conclusions from his analysis.
Stuart Otteson’s - The Bolt Action
(This paragraph was made while discussing how the Mod 70 evolved from the Mod 54)
Model 70
The principal change made to this long and extremely sturdy receiver was moving the front guard screw rearward from the recoil lug to the front bedding flat for the Model 70. The new centered location not only evenly
distributes tension, but the clamping action now helps reinforce the recoil area of the stock. This, combined with a much larger, better positioned recoil lug than used in the classic military actions, and an exceptionally stiff
receiver midsection, permits very stable bedding, a key to the Model 70's long history of success in competitive shooting.
One occasionally reads how siderail receivers lack the rigidity of cylindrical types, this conclusion usually supported by comparing the Remington Model 700 and Mauser M98. Yet, the Model 70 proves that the siderail type
can also be made very stiff. As the accompanying drawings show, its deep girder-like midsection makes it one of the most rigid bolt-action receivers ever designed.
effective turnbolt shrouding system
Almost any engineering solution involves compromise, however, and Remington’s solid cartridge-head encirclement is no exception. The tiny internally-mounted C-spring extractor involved lacks an integral purchase.
The retaining lip thus made necessary within the bolt head increases boltface counterbore depth beyond an optimum figure, and cartridge-head protrusion from the chamber is on the high side, far more than in a Mauser,
and even exceeding that in the Springfield rifle. Starting with a bolt counterbore of about .150 in., and adding clearances, tolerances, and the chamber-mouth radius, protrusion approaches minimum cartridge web
thickness. Thus careful barrel fitting is particularly important in this rifle. It might be interesting to closely examine the Remington bolt-nose fit. Clearance is approximately .010 in. (.010 in. diametral clearance and .010 in. end gap) which restricts, but normally, of course, could not seal gas escape. Under extreme pressure, however, this breech can actually obturate. This is detailed in Remington’s breech patent (U.S. Patent 2,585,195 issued Feb. 12, 1952 (M. H. Walker]) describing tests where pressure expanded the bolt-nose rim into the barrel to seal off everything but the firing pin hole.
This expansion, while damaging the bolt nose, nevertheless protected the rest of the action under conditions completely wrecking all other actions
tested. To verify that the shroud accounted for this strength, Remington also tested and destroyed several Model 721 prototypes modified to eliminate the barrel counterbore. It’s perhaps logical then to consider fitting the breech even tighter to increase effectiveness. Analysis will show that the normal Remington tolerances are already close to minimum from a production standpoint. But would it be useful to lap-in the counterbore of a custom barrel for more positive bolt-nose support? Probably not. The factory rifle is already susceptible to dirt. Nothing puts a Model 700 out of action faster than a
loose grain of powder or a primer fragment entrapped in the counterbore. A much closer fit would certainly impair reliability. Some custom benchrest rifles built on the Remington action are fitted closer than factory practice,
and sometimes even a loose bristle from a bore brush will jam these.
