There are a bunch of enduring myths involved in any discussion of those guns. One is that the .38 Long Colt was totally useless, akin to shooting an enemy with a paint ball gun. Another is that anything in .45 caliber will blow an enemy into little pieces and scatter the remains over a 50 acre lot. Still others are that bullets expand a lot at normal pistol velocities (under, say, 1100-1200 fps) and that any expanding bullet is better than any non-expanding one, regardless of calibers.
Still another is that the .38 revolver was replaced by the M1911 auto pistol, or by the SAA, both with smashing power so great that the Moros immediately became peaceful farmers.
And a common and enduring myth is that those revolvers were made only for .38 Long Colt and will blow up if fired with the super powerful .38 Special.
To take the last first, most collectors don't know that from c.1903 on, Colt chambered both their commercial and military line for .38 Special, and advertised the guns as being for that caliber (standard velocity only, there was no +P or +P+ at the time). The older guns can even accept and fire .357, but that is not recommended.
As for the weak .38 LC, it is on a par with the military revolvers of the day, and better than most. It is common to read someone denounce the .38 Colt revolver and the LC cartridge, and then praise the British WWII Webley and Enfield .38 revolvers, which fired a round that is actually less powerful than the .38 LC.
The belief that anything called .45 is super powerful has been disproven so often it is not worth discussing. The .38 Colt revolver was not replaced by the M1911, but by the M1909 .45 revolver. (Officially; in fact .38 revolvers were issued and ammo contracted for throughout WWI.) And neither gun was so impressive that the rebels surrendered; the fighting went on for years and in fact is still going on.
Jim