I had a difficult time getting into the swing of narrating my results, but mostly because I never felt confident as a player distinguishing degrees of success or failure. I'll make a point of working on that in Book 2.
Character advancement is welcome of course, but the system seems not to require it. It has a very pulpy feel in which everyone is capable, but also a sort of "a man is a man and a bullet will kill him" kind of feel which I liked. The story was engaging, and I felt progressively better equipped as play went on by the accumulation of tools, knowledge, and allies. Judging the system alone, I think it would be insufficient to hold my interest if the narrative had been less awesome. As it was though, I actually liked it more for its invisibility.
I thought you did a good job of including conditional modifiers on rolls, which is something I always mean to do in my games that I usually lose track of in the heat of play. It made a big difference for me re: LF's comment about being one-trick ponies. I never felt bashful about taking my chances on something even if I didn't have an expression to throw in the pot. I suppose I did feel like there were times that we faced down a challenge, had rolled too low to succeed, and we all waited around on each other to manifest some kind of mechanical bonus to keep us from game-ending catastrophe. Not sure of any solution off the top of my head, but it could be a good spot to look for amending the system.
Anyway, this was a great game and I am eager to continue at your convenience.