Some folks get it, that if you buy two seperate parts at two times, that tolerances can stack and thats life.
Others make it work out.
Still others should have bought a matched/mated set all at the same time.
And then there are a few that realize, that gap has NO relationship to anything functional or accuracy wise, except in your head.
Having trained and worked as a machinist using CNC equipment, I understand stacked tolerances. I also understand that with proper care even cheap CNC machines are capable of far greater precision that these parts exhibited. I don't know what equipment AERO uses but they claim that "By personally designing and engineering state of the science tooling in-shop, we’re able to leverage the latest machine tool technologies to provide you with components of the highest quality". They also claim to maintain "razor thin tolerance levels".
Modern machining centers can maintain +/- .0002" positioning accuracy with .00008" repeatability. Some centers are even better, some worse. The days of +/- .001" tolerances are long gone for "state of the science" equipment. Even at +/- .001", though, it takes a LOT of stacking or poor design prints or tooling/equipment maintenance to get to a .0275" gap.
The reason I purchased an AERO upper was the expectation of higher quality and tighter tolerances, as claimed, and that the two AERO parts would mate properly. After viewing the same photo I posted here, AERO agreed the gap was, to use their word, "excessive".
I agree the problem is mostly cosmetic, although the gap is large enough to allow foreign matter to get into the rifle's inner workings. Cosmetics, however, are not unimportant to me as an end consumer purchasing non-blem parts. If you bought a new car and the paint started peeling off before you got home, would you just shrug your shoulders and accept it or would you head back to the dealer?
Bear in mind that I did not ask AERO to replace any parts but rather just asked them to review the photo and tell me if the gap was normal.
Could I have lived with the gap? Sure, but when AERO admits it is "excessive" by their standards and wants to make it right, what is wrong with allowing them to do so?