Thanks everyone for the replies.

I finally had a chance last week to stop by the gun shop and look at both 627's up close.
Both examples were a bit rough for brand new guns... both had a mixture of the usual s&w problems -- canted barrels, poorly cut forcing cones, and tooling marks / cosmetic defects in multiple areas.
One of the two guns was considerably worse off than the other, due to a MAJOR functional defect. The barrel to cylinder gap was filed or cut VERY unevenly, leaving the left side tight and practically rubbing the cylinder while the right hand side had the largest barrel to cylinder gap that I have ever seen on a revolver after well over 20 years in the shooting sports. The defect was so extreme that I actually wonder if the entire barrel was installed in the frame at an angle.
I recommended to the salesman that it be sent back rather than being sold, but I doubt that will happen. Whoever ends up with that gun is going to have immediate and major issues with gas and lead blowback.
Needless to say, I left empty handed and the desire for a new 627 is out of my system again for the time being.
I really believe most people would gladly pay an extra $50 - $100 for every new S&W revolver if they could be guaranteed that it was built properly. The problem here, I think, is that without some major changes to production, any new QC procedures put in place would simply end up rejecting far more guns than the number that would pass QC.