No kidding? From my personal experience mine has been an easy 1/2 MOA driver with my handloads.
No need to dismiss the capabilities of a rifle that you have no experience with. Also, when 'setting' limitations of what a 1 MOA rifle should, can and cannot do, let's not forget the operator, handloaded vs factory ammo, etc. Getting to well under 1 MOA has never been a problem for any (5) of my Rem M700's with my handloads, of which three, including my MLR are legitimate LR rigs. Todays modern rifles nearly always have the potential to outperform the nut behind the wheel.......
The 700's have two components worthy of consideration, the action and the trigger. In some of the more recent examples the triggers aren't anything to write home about either. I too have owned a number of M-700 rifles. Some of these I've kept factory and some I've had tweaked. The tweaked rifles always outshoot the factory rifles. The accuracy difference might not be a useful advantage for a big game rifle but the consistancy improvement is. To remain competitive, there is no way Remington can match the bedding, barrel quality, or finishing of a custom rifle with an off the shelf product.
Anyone who purchases an off the shelf 700 and expects it to shoot with a custom rifle, will be disappointed, if they have seen a custom rifle shoot. A half MOA factroy rifle is unlikely to shoot half minute groups 500 yards down range, and the .338 Lapua round has the trajectory and retained velocity potential for hits 3 times that far. The advantage of the off the shelf rifles is instant availability, not quality. Rather than driving their customers into the waiting arms of the custom rifle builders, you would think Remington would prefer to keep them in the fold, but the mass produced product mindset seems unwilling to shift gears in this manner.
I think there is a market for the .338 Lapua. I think it is was wise to market rifles chambered for that round in both an off-the-rack and a custom version. Rather than bringing out endless off-the-rack versions of the same rifle, Remington would be much farther ahead to direct folks to their custom shop where 40X rifles would be built to the customer's specifications. The customer then has input to the features he wants on his rifle and that results in a more satisfied customer. The way it works now, Remington dresses a rifle up in a Halloween costume, hangs a provocative name on it, and markets it as a new product rather than attempting to produce a better product.
Given Remington's purchasing power, elements from big name makers could be provided at discounted prices and specialized machine work could be done for a fraction of the cost of what a small shop would have to charge. The customer could have a choice of a Kreiger, Heart or other barrel with a specific twist, cut to a specific length, and chambered for a specific bullet. Instead of a stock supplied by the lowest tender price, a McMillan, Sheehane, Robertson, or some other could be supplied on a cost plus basis. Other specialty services could be provided such as an under forearm rail, right hand bolt - left hand ejection, and many other specialty items the custom builders are very good at supplying. This represents revenue Remington could have for themselves and rather than making $100 profit on each unit produced, they could realize $1000 profit per rifle that would otherwise go to a small shop. While perhaps this is not the best thing for the firearms industry or even for the shooting public, it would certainly be better for Remington. Until they see that, the small shops are in an enviable position.
Canada is not a huge market, but it is a market that Remington's marketing people have now closed to a portion of the company's product line. This is not due to any feature of the rifle other than the name they marketed it under. A Remington 40X chambered for .338 Lapua is not going to raise any alarm bells with the State Department regardless of the color its painted.
