Without question TMoose, gland design and machining are critical when it comes to soft seated seals. But basic machining practice(s) can be applied to guard against "making a thread", "plunge with no transverse", etc. In general, the piece is imparted a high surface finish in turning by increasing RPM and slowing down feed. I've seen pieces that show your reflection, thus the seal was truly superior in an o-ring application.
As mentioned earlier, I've used o-rings in excessive pressure applications, 5 ksi, 10 ksi, 15 ksi, without a problem. You need to be diligent about o-ring stretch and squeeze in addition to gland design. This is why the Parker-Hannifin Handbook is so valuable, it discusses in detail the engineering practice while providing suggested gland geometry for a particular selection of o-ring. It is possible to bastardize a gland by interpolating between set values, thus maintaining o-ring stretch and squeeze. You still need to select these proper values based upon static, dynamic, reciprocating, face seal, etc, stretch and squeeze vary tremendously depending on application. Material selection is also another important consideration, fluids interact with the base rubber matrix and introduce secondary effects such as explosive decompression, hydrocarbon mitigration, o-ring degragation, etc. There is no magic material that is a silver bullet against ALL fluid applications.
So while your situation of gland manufacturing is an important one, it is often not the only issue surrounding soft seat sealing. It is generally known that o-rings can seal against liberal tolerances, but stepped gland ID, coarse surface finish and poor design are killers!
At any rate, you've brought up some nice points!
Kenneth J Hueston, PEng
Principal
Sturni-Hueston Engineering Inc
Edmonton, Alberta Canada