> actual inefficiencies of the Soviet system were significantly underestimated in the dominant Western narrative
Not at all.
> Your ideas about Soviet industry appear to be based on some ideology rather than familiarity with Soviet culture.
They are based on quite sizable knowledge of history of warfare, defense technology. Which all the effort of the Soviet system was geared towards. Placing its efficiency there.
> Since quality of manufacture was usually terrible
There. That bit is strongly-entrenched Cold War propaganda that actually stems from the aristocratic propaganda against the left-wing ideologies when they first appeared in late 19th century - 'them peasants' cant do anything good.
For example, in this outlook, we are told that T-34 had 'terrible build quality' because one could see outside from in between some riveted plates. And this is drummed up incessantly by comparing mainly Angloamerican tanks to Soviet ones. Not outright saying that those tanks were better, mind that - because the track record of that particular Soviet technology, the T-34, is too obvious to be able to deny. But anything can be smeared. And that's the objective of such propaganda. Similarly, Angloamerican establishment diminishes German or Italian technologies by smearing them with non-related issues. Absolutely no different than how outlets like Murdoch press operate today.
None of which have any relation to the questions at hand, obviously - since no bullet could statistically enter from the tiny opening in between the riveted plates of T-34, nor the 'over-complicated' German tanks had much problem with being so because they were mainly intended for defense operations in the latter parts of the war so they did not need to travel much.
Same goes for consumer sectors.
The fact that Soviet system raised more than a hundred million people from mud huts to apartments, from illiteracy to space age is undeniable. So, it is SMEARED on the 'quality' of Kruschevka apartments, and, well, its rather hard to smear Soviet scientists, but they try anyway.
The USSR was chronically short of everything outside what was needed for the military to fight World War 3, indeed. That was because they had only 15% of the world's resources to rely on in order to maintain a military bloc that was preparing to fight the war to end human civilization.
One can easily turn the table and say that, why the US, who had 85% of world's resources and who had the benefit of making entire '3rd world' work as its unpaid colonies had so much poverty, homelessness and suffering in the same period. Especially among the blacks, minorities and those who were not from the 'right' socioeconomic background.
Then again, the inefficiency is built into capitalism in the form of maximization of profit.