IF the manufactuing tools and quality control are good enough, it should be possible to assemble any unit from a pile of parts, and it will function satisfactorily.
I think that this started with Eli Whitney making guns in USA, and the concept spread to moving production lines, a la Henry Ford.
(I spent many years of life in just such an environment. And the better we were, the fewer complaints came back from the field; except from those who abused the product by running without oil or coolant!)
In statistical terms, often the aim is to have all of the product fall within two standard deviations of the mean. Getting it within three makes for more rejects, but a higher quality and more consistent product.
We may not realise it, but rely on these techniques with almost everything that we buy.
But a lttle careful fine tuning can make a woirld of difference to the performance of a product.
Whilst I will not condone putright poor quality, as hobbyists, the time that we spend deburring, and making fine adjustments brings benefits that would have have cost us a lot more had they been made at the fcatory.
How mnay of us are sufficiently skilled as fitters to be able to get within 0.005″ with a hammer and chisel?
(Let alone in a short space of time)
The advent of electronic control of engines and production processes has decreased the need for fine tuning.
Lacking the close electronic control of the processes, greatr resort has to be made to manual intervention. And this involves labour and time. (Which is one of the reasons why a Rolls Royce is more expensive than a small economy car. But for most of the time, is the difference really noticeable? )
At 70 mph a Toyota Aygo covers the ground just as quickly as a Rolls Royce, although in less luxury, and takes more time to get to 70 mph, but less fuel.
If you MUST have a toolroom quality lathe, you buy one; but it will cost more, and last far longer than a bottom of the range hobby machine.
You pays your money (if you have it) and takes your choice.
Howard