What you are saying is that Winchester was permitted to use and experiment with any number of different composition metals to produce a weapon under government scrutiny during war time without compensation or contract changes.

1. Composition CM
2. Compositon A
3. Composition "dot"
4. Compositon unmarked.

It simply begs credulity that 3 or 4 difference non conforming non standard non approved metals would or could be used to build Garands without any Government explanation or notes by Hatcher and others. Heat treatment would be a bitch.

The fact that some guy said this or some guy said that at some substandard soils or plastic testing lab doing gratis stuff, is well, shoddy.

One metal difference is pretty wild to consider, but three or 4 different compositions during WAR time as an EXPERIMENT--plus standard WD steel is just too much. EXPERIMENTAL. John Garandicon would puke.

The weakist link in any evidence chain is the deviant factor--that is the so called lab's results. Many people have been sent to jail on hearsay and bogus lab results. I call BS on that lab and its source.

The gov't imply did not allow 4 different steels to produce weapons, without permission and a paper trail that is incontrovertible, especially after the 1930's development period-- and the mandated revision numbers on all 1940's parts changes and drawing numbers-- referring to drawings and changes.
Different metals would require a new drawing number ot reflect changes. At least that is what history tells us about the Garand.

You guys are far more sophisticated than to have the wool pulled over your eyes on one labs supposed results long ago.

Time for a comprehensive test based upon blind neutrals and competing labs to reveal the truth.