IMO, and having been a collector of many eras of USGI Milsurp gear over the decades, it's time to put old Milsurp Alice gear out to pasture.  The reason for my saying this is that most of it has been used hard, and time/use has taken its' toll.

The Cotton (M1956) gear is completely unacceptable as it is subject to rot and mildew, unlike the nylon gear (mostly).  Aside from that, the Mil found the nylon (M1967 gear FAR lighter overall, and especially when wet, and easier to clean if subjected to NBC contaminants.  Consider selling nice M1956 gear on ebay--see below.

An unalterable thing about nylon ALICE gear is that the waterproofing coating is subject to de-lamination given enough heat and time--mostly time.  So, the coating begins to stink as it degrades, and will continue to do so until it is completely gone.  It's possible to accelerate this process by turning the gear inside-out, and exposing the coating to direct sunlight; the process will still take a while, though-- and that's the problem: the waterproof coating falls-off at its' own rate, and will still stink during while it's decomposing.

Any coated nylon fabric will eventually do the same sort of delamination/stink, even modern gear.  Take heed.

Another approach is to use a stiff brush to remove as much of the waterproof coating as possible, and then use some "Tent Floor Seal" to encapsulate the remainder, hopefully a small remainder.  Only consider this if only intermittent flecks or small patches of the original coating are still present.  This requires painting-on a thin coating, and I have found small foam brushes best.  Buy quite a few, as they wear out fairly quickly-- you will see what I mean if you try this.  In my experience, this is a very laborious process.  One side-benefit to this process is that the user can sear the edges of exposed fabric and threads far more easily before treating the fabric, since they will be better exposed.

If you can stand the smell of your elderly ALICE gear's waterproof coating degrading--and it will lessen over time as long as you brush it and wash it-- then consider spraying the outside of the gear with spray-on DWR.  Doing so will greatly retard the water-absorption of the nylon fabric.  It's not "waterproof", and does degrade over time, but it does not stink in the meantime, and is easier to renew.

Those having minty-new ALICE gear should consider selling it on Ebay.  Condition is Everything, and if it looks like new, you are far better off selling it to a collector than usiing it.  Might bring surprising $.  Very rare equiment still relies on the "Condition Rule", but I have seen some lightly damaged, but quite rare items go for surprising $. Having sold-off a LOT of milsurp gear, I have some experience with this.

Still, the aforementioned notwithstanding, ALICE gear is nowadays not considered first-rate  Sure, it works, but so does a Ford Model T. Fine for emergency hand-outs, but if you're in that situation, Heaven help you, not least for the type of your hand-out gear.

FWIW, ALICE gear was fine in its' day, and some parts of the ensemble still have their uses.  For example, the Med and Large ALICE packs (perhaps modified by Tactical Tailor), mounted on suitable MOLLE frames (Hellcat), the pistol belt, and even the updated Buttpack, with OEM Fastex buckles.  The compass/first aid pouches are OK for M1 Garand clips, but use TT lightweight MALICE clips in lieu of the ALICE clips, PLEASE.

I still have LOADS of ALICE gear, a good deal of it modified, sitting in storage.  I will consider posting it on the EE.

Ah, Yes, Belgian Combo Device, and tube-handle bayonet.  Similar to my FAL set-up.  Good choice, accuracy-wise; it did well in my tests done long ago, posted both here and at Falfiles.  If it is still available, the South African compensator device that slipped over the BCD is also a considerable accuracy-enhancer.  Best accuracy results in my personal, semi-scientific teats were with BCD and SA slip-over device.  Full-weight STOLL was a close second, but much longer, so I sent with the BCD, naturally.  To sum up, the more weight (mass) at the end of the FAL military-style barrel, the better the accuracy. The SA device (added mass) also had the benefit of being a compensator in itself, and re-directed muzzle blast perfectly for a right-handed shooter.  It was probably intended for Full-auto fire, but works well in semi-auto, whilst adding useful mass (accuracy enhancement) to the OEM FAL barrel. I'd use it during the daytime, as I suspect it enhanced muzzle flash, as compared to the bare BCD.

There are probably better flash suppressors available nowadays, compared to when I performed my long-ago comparison with all the then-available flash suppressors from DSArms.  At that point, I was testing for accuracy, and not for flash suppression. OTOH, other flash suppressors probably entail giving up the bayonet.   Your call on that aspect.  I am satisfied with my current rig (Long BCD+SA Device) but if I opted for a "medium weight" barrel, for enhanced accuracy at longer ranges, I would opt for an A2-style flash suppressor specifically intended for a .308 rifle.  Beware of re-worked A2 5.56 flash suppressors--For example, the currently-offered "A2-style" FS offered by DSArms looks to me like a re-worked 5.56 FS.  Look closely, and you can see so.   A purpose-made .308 A2 FS will be longer than a 5.56 FS--has to be, on account of the increased volume of gasses expelled from the muzzle.
YMMV.

I don't disagree with anything you've said, for those on a very tight budget.  Allow me to make a suggestion:  Ditch the ALICE pistol belt, and buy a decent, simple padded waist belt with a QD buckle, and PALS webbing on its' outer surface.  Maybe something like this: https://store.oldgrouch.biz/uspamobesuse.html

Then you can get rid of the ALICE clips, and use SHORT MALICE clips for your ALICE stuff.  The SHORT MALIE clips were specifically made for ALICE gear; you need to use the correct slot on the tab to get a good fit with the SHORT MALICE clips.  MUCH more comfortable (and a tinch less weight) than any un-padded pistol belt, BTDT.  For stuff that uses wire hangars, there are some MOLLE adaptors that have the metal grommets for hanger-style items such as this: https://www.amazon.com/G-I-Military-MOLLE-Alice-Adaptor/dp/B005N3K05Y/ref=pd_day0_hl_200_5/132-8357810-0970304?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B005N3K05Y&pd_rd_r=1616900a-84e7-11e9-a9ce-814cf5dd9e62&pd_rd_w=ADUzG&pd_rd_wg=0xIod&pf_rd_p=ad07871c-e646-4161-82c7-5ed0d4c85b07&pf_rd_r=TXAQP7AX9YGDSCR67BYT&psc=1&refRID=TXAQP7AX9YGDSCR67BYT

Shop around; not suggesting any particular vendor, although Old Grouch is a member/Dealer here, IIRC.

God luck; I've updated a fair amount of ALICE gear over the years, so I know it can be done.

I've owned SA cotton canvas '58-based gear (Pattern 70), and it was some of the heaviest , stoutest, canvas I've ever seen.  Well-made, but I wouldn't want to carry it when wet.

The SA Nylon vest was well-made, but not at all user-configurable.  One either has a 5.56 vest, or a 7.62 vest, both with all sorts of non-removeable pouches, and a ton of straps that made me think I was somehow missing key components, or at least lacking in knowledge about how the vest was supposed to be used/configured.  Well-made, as you say, but surpassed by modern, configurable gear.  I think a simple, user configured, MOLLE vest would be almost as well-made, and more useful, as well as lighter.  YMMV.

It's called the "Tab" closure method.

I think you make a very good point, in that modern MOLLE gear is currently cheap and widely available (like ALICE gear used to be), and much more user configurable.  Even the Grey-speckled UCP gear can be easily dyed at little cost, and to great benefit.

I don't see where even the most dead-broke and die-hard ALICE user can't benefit from upgrading to USGI MOLLE gear.  The two platforms were designed to be compatible; ALICE gear can be used on MOLLE platforms, for sure.  The ALICE clips will work, but the lightweight MALICE fasteners are miles better than the old clips.  I still use some very specific ALICE items, but the ALICE clips are long gone.

To dedicated ALICE Users:  Get yourself a MOLLE vest and/or belt, some LW MALICE clips for your ALICE pouches, and see what you think.
.

It's a good day when I see you posting here, again, Rod, and thank you for the kind comments.  You have always been a solid contributor, and have made some very clever gear mods.  I--and may I say, many of us--are looking forward to your future contributions to the forum.
May I suggest that you have a look at my thread here on dyeing UCP MOLLE gear?  https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/On-Dyeing-with-Rit-Dye-Many-Pix-/10-429475/

The straight apple green Rit dye gives a better contrast, but some might find it a bit much, so the 4 to 1 apple green/dark green ratio is an alternative.  For brownish terrains, taupe is the only answer.  Since the lighter pixels will take the dye more than the darker ones, solution strength (amount of dye) and immersion time control the end result.

I have come to think that when dyeing UCP, maintaining the contrast between the lighter pixels and the darker ones is most important.  What color one uses (Green vs. Brown) is important only as regards one's AO.  What really matters is dyeing the lighter pixels the desired tint, but NOT going overboard.

In any event, some contrast between the various pixels is extremely important, lest the contrast be lost, and the "break-up" of the pattern also be lost.  IOW, some experimentation is extremely useful, and such should be done on "discardable" items.
When dyeing UCP, select the right tint, and go by the maxim that "Less is More".

Great to see you posting here again, Rod.

All the best to you and the family!

As an aside with respect to the MOLLE 4000, this pack was designed as a "Purpose-Built" Airborne ruck, and with specific input from ABN troops.  As such, it contains a lot of webbing and hooks, most of which can be removed without any cutting or damage to the various components, or the pack itself.  All this stuff adds-in weight, and is no zero use if not operating as Airborne.  I would suggest taking copious notes/pix when removing the unneeded strapping, as re-installing it later on WILL, repeat WILL, be problematic without anything with which to reference.   Mine came with everything except the "drop-line/strap", which I was able to buy cheap.  Not that I plan on using it, but the opportunity presented itself.  It is quite involved to remove/re-install the webbing and so forth.  I can't believe any Soldier or Marine having the time to do so when on ops.  It's complicated enough that I would think they are actually prohibited from doing so.

This particular pack seems to be very popular amongst the intended users.  Whether or not that is due to the "Built-in" features of the required ABN strapping, thus reducing the time/effort required for ABN personnel to use it in ABN ops, or whether it is due to its' size/configuration I don't know.  Both features are mentioned by Mil users, as well as the center of gravity of the pack seeming to suit most users better than the larger MOLLE pack.  This last is important, but since most MOLLE pack users are presumably ill-trained on how to "drive' their packs, perhaps questionable.  A larger, heavier pack is always going to be a greater burden, and tougher to "drive".

The MOLLE 4000 seems to be popular enough that a separate version, deleting most, if not all, of the ABN features could be offered.  This version would be lighter, and have zero drawbacks to the "leg" infantry.  Time will tell.

I think most experienced users of MilSurp packs, who, presumably, are able to resist the urge to "fill the pack", would be better off with the Large MOLLE Pack vice the MOLLE 4000.  Vast price difference aside, the slight weight penalty of a less-than-full Large pack allows for the needed room in case it's needed, such as when winter camping; IOW, more versatile.  YMMV.

I just found some M1967 20 rounder's on ebay for $22 each. And another place for $23.

Are you finding them priced higher than that?