Well, I was issued an M1 rifle in 1955, so I am not a WWII vet.
First off, no one who ever served in the military ever called it a "Garand" any more than they called the M1 Carbine a "Williams". The new naming convention that replaced the date (Model 1903, Model 1911) had just been implemented in 1937 and the first weapon adopted was the M1 rifle, or "U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30, M1", to give it its full name. Later came the M1 Carbine, M1 SMG, M1 tank (the famed Sherman was the M4; we got up to M60 and have now started over).
But if a GI spoke of an M1, with no other qualifying term, he meant the M1 rifle.
The M1 had a number of advantages over other WWII battle rifles. In the first place, it was semi-auto. At the outbreak of war, only the Soviet Union had adopted a semi-auto (Tokarev) and it was in short supply and not as reliable as the M1. It was not until 1943 that the Germans issued a semi-auto rifle in quantity (the Gewehr (rifle) 41W was issued in some numbers, but not as many as the G.43), and it too was inferior to the M1.
The most commonly denounced feature of the M1 was the clip loading. But this was not the "deficiency" many armchair experts believe. The design is the work of genius. Unlike a magazine using a spring (G.43 or M14), the M1 design feeds every round at exactly the same pressure, and maximum pressure is exerted at the point it is needed, at the point where the bolt is fully rearward and ready to pick up the next round.
A high capacity magazine rifle like the M14 might have been better, but in reality might not. One of the advantages of the M1 system is that the ammunition is packed ready for immediate use, with little of the extra weight and bulk inherent in issuing magazines. With M14's or M16's, the magazines must first be supplied, and then the ammo supplied in some form (stripper clips) that can be used to load the magazines. This is done partly because magazines are heavy, bulky, and costly and because of the concern that magazine springs might "set" if left loaded during long term storage and shipping. In military quantities, this extra weight and bulk are significant.
BTW, none of the nations that issued detachable magazine rifles in WWII (England, Germany, and the USSR) issued pre-loaded extra magazines. The G.43 issue was two spares, the British issued one spare, and the Russians issued (I think) one spare. All expected the soldier to load the magazine on-rifle with stripper clips.
There are two myths that need some de-bunking. The first is that the M1 was fired for speed and accuracy against the British Enfield and the Enfield won. True to a point, but the comparison was made with a green GI against a picked, professional "Tommy" who had spent years working with the Enfield. (The SMLE (No.1 or No.4) is without doubt the fastest turnbolt action in the world, and the British were very expert in its use.) Note though that when the issuing of a semi-auto was first discussed, the main advantage was considered not to be rapidity of fire, but the reduced fatigue of the soldier who had to work a bolt action rifle; the British soldiers had become full athletes and were able to keep up firing for long periods.
The second myth is the nonsense about how the "ping" of an M1 clip told the enemy that an American's rifle was empty. The enemy then charged across 100 yards, or 500 yards, or whatever, and bayonetted the poor GI in his foxhole. Of course it is never explained how the enemy heard the "ping" over the noise of battle or what the other Americans were doing while the enemy soldier was running that 100 yards, or 200 yards, or 500 yards. The myth assumes they just watched, having bought tickets to the show. I first saw that silliness in an old magazine some 50 years ago; from other nonsense in the article, it was evident that the writer knew nothing about guns and had never been in service. He sounded like a teen-ager, but he sold the article.
A real defect of the M1 magazine system, and one recognized by the Army, was that a soldier who had fired part of a clip would either eject it and waste the ammo or fire off the rest in the general direction of the enemy so as to reload with a fresh clip. They thought that a detachable magazine which could be replenished when partly empty would solve the problem, but it did so only partially.
You might include also a note on ammunition supply. When considering things like issuing loaded magazines, it is interesting to consider that from late 1941 to late 1945, Frankford Arsenal, the Army's main ammunition factory, turned out 1.3 million round of .30 ammunition PER DAY. Other plants, like Remington, Winchester and St. Louis, equalled that. When dealing with ammo in those quantities, weight and size of packaging matter - a lot.
You have permission to quote or use the above as you want; only please quote accurately.
HTH
Jim
!