Length alone is not the problem. I own a very nice 1908 7X57 full wood military Mauser that is an inch over 4' long and this rifle is a joy to carry and shoot, even in heavy cover. Within reason, neither is weight a problem provided the piece is well balanced. I carried a 12 pound double rifle over hill and dale under the African sun in Tanzania without loosing my desire to be there. But my modern .308 target rifle, an inch shorter than that gorgeous Mauser, with it's long high mounted S&B 4-16X 34 mm scope, equipped with a bi-pod because it is so muzzle heavy that it is all but impossible to shoot off hand or even for shooting slung up from a supported position, and weighing in at 20 pounds or so, is miserable to carry from the truck to the firing line. Clearly your Savage is not as bad to carry as my .308, but neither is it going to be as nice to hunt with as my 7X57. While your Savage is heavier than a true sporter, and while the balance will be decidedly muzzle heavy, it is more along the lines of a walking varmint rifle than it is to a full blown target rifle, in large part due to its slim stock. I could see such a rifle being useful as deer/pronghorn/coyote rifle in the country that extends from south-western Manitoba, across much of southern Saskatchewan, into south-eastern Alberta.
Ontario is a pretty big place with very diverse topography. If my recollection of the country along the north Shore of Lake Superior is accurate, I would look for something lighter in a rifle should hunting in that type of terrain be in your plans. However, if your hunting style involves more glassing and less movement in gentler terrain, that outfit will do fine. It would also do fine if you were to hunt from a quad or snowmobile, where the seat can be used as a padded rest, if legal. Although its not my first choice of cartridge, I would not be at all concerned taking a moose with a .270 provided it was loaded with an appropriate bullet. I can't imagine a situation where a .30/06 would prevail with a 180 bullet but a .270 would fail with a 150, there just isn't that much difference between them. But in thick cover, the low magnification of your scope is not low enough, so your field of view will be too narrow for a snap shot at a fleeting target. The scope body is long and if you leave the bi-pod attached they will both catch on branches when you are in a hurry. For big game hunting purposes, a smaller scope combined with a sling that is suitable for both carrying and shooting the rifle (google Galco Safari Ching Sling) will be more useful to you than the bi-pod and high powered scope, unless you intend to delve into long range game shooting, but that game is not for everyone.
