I'm afraid I chose the garand, but only because the STG 44 wasn't on here.
Feel like the garand can offer the greatest degree of accuracy and support for its weight. Downside is ease of maintenance (or lack thereof) and extra weight, as well as costs in means of time, resources, training and repair.
MG 42 just weighs too much, needs too much spare ammo, and needs lots of equiptment. I'm also curious if the cost of manufacture and time/resources involved in making and fielding it made it worth it. Upside is that in the right place, it's a force of nature.
Enfield, well, I like them, but it's a bolt action. Easy to shoot, but just too many limiting factors. I feel like it edged the stg 44 out of the running simply because people know and feel a connection to the enfield, rather than a particular preference for performance.
Pros are that it's likely by far the cheapest to produce, easiest to maintain, most rugged and accurate. If I was going to walk off into the forest and never come back, this would be my gun.