Bolt question on 1933 Terni 1891 Rifle

I have acquired a 1891 rifle made by Terni in 1933 that appears to be in very good condition. With the correct ammunition, it is accurate on the 100 yard and 200 yard range when the 300 meter battlefield zero sight is used. When I bought it, it came with a carbine bolt. I had picked up several correct rifle bolts with straight handles over time and had a proper cleaning rod, so I can restore it to original configuration.

Of the three correct bolts, one is marked Terni (in an oval), the second is FNA, and the third is marked PG.

If I want to get as "original" as I can with this rifle, I presume I should use the Terni marked bolt. My question is, does it really matter, because I understand the Italians regularly re-used older bolts when making newer rifles. If they did, did they grind and re-stamp the bolt or just use what they had? (I have two Carcanos that I know came back from Italy with a GI, on both of these the bolt shows the same mfg as the receiver. They were both made in 1943.)

The second question is firing pin protrusion and the shape of the end of the pin. From looking at forums on line, the best info I can find is that max protrusion when decocked is about 1/16". When I look closely at the several bolts I have, some pins are well rounded, others appear to be somewhat squared off. Protrusion also varies a bit. Any thoughts here?

Thanks for any thoughts.

Best regards

The Italians didn't serialize the bolts on the Carcano except for the early M91s. Things that wouldn't be found on a 1933 example is a early style extractor (i.e. drilled though the locking lug), and odds are it would have a Terni bolt originally, that being said what is most important now is that the bolt headspaces properly to the rifle.