You can see the archived poll results on the Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20221220093741/https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/72542
OK, polls are fun and I just wanted to be the first to use a poll as a means to post a quiz? 
2?
Would it not depend on the reflector?
I know stereos to double the sound you need to quadruple the power, so Ill take a rough guess at x2...
Although I something is telling me x1.4.. but Ill stick to x2.
Locking in 2 times as far.
Fun fact: In a typical XM-L flashlight, the throw distance (as defined by ANSI/NEMA) is roughly 8000 times it's reflector diameter.
1.43, because of the eye sensitivity, which is near logarithmic
2 times as far 
2 times as far, since throw is defined by lux on target, not by visual effect.
Even if it was, we have two targets at different distances that get the same lux, so the eye's logarithmic response is irrelevant in this case.
i guess you just have to compare 2 identical lights but with a different emitter (but that would have to have the same size...). So everything the same just increasing output like you would have medium 50% and high 100% on a light
For the really far throwers, "problem" is that in reality after factoring atmospheric losses, it is significantly more. I can only get 4 million candelas to throw about 2km. This is about right actually, target @ 1 lux.
It does, but their influence is already contained in the respective measurements (i.e. 25kcd and 100 kcd, each with its own reflector).
Lux drops with distance squared. That's because if you are shining a light on a wall, the hotspot makes a circle. As you move the light away from the wall, the radius of the circle goes up linearly with the distance. Twice as far from the wall gives twice as big a circle. But the area of the circle goes up with the square of the distance so the same light is being distributed over a bigger area and intensity is less.
It seems like it should be a cubic root because you are dealing with 3D space and if you had a point source with light going in all directions that might be true. But with a flashlight it all comes down to the circle on the wall.
Thats why Ill choose the 1.4!
And the answer is … 2 times as far!
I’m glad I put in the 1.4 or it would have been too easy (apparently)!
Light declines at the square of the distance from the source so for throw you take the square root to determine how far the light will go before you are left with 1 lux or .25 lux or whatever your standard is for throw.
As mentioned the eye’s logarithmic response to light isn’t what’s going on here.
Regarding the other factors involved in throw (reflectors, emitter, drive current, etc) those factors were already reflected in the kcd figures. So the two lights didn’t have to be identical (as was brought up in one post).
Since I phrased the question in terms of percentages (2 times) the standard of throw didn’t matter either. It could have been 1 lux or the ANSI standard of .25 lux (moon light).
This wasn’t the hardest “quiz” but it turned out to elicit some interesting responses and was fun.
Yeah, on paper it is twice as far.
In real life we may have to consider some factors like dust, humidity... blah blah blah, which may cause the real throwing range reduced from what we have calculated.
It should still be twice as far whatever twice is under those circumstances.
Agree on that, as far as two lights (100kcd and 25kcd) are being placed and compared under the same external conditions, right?
Right.
The point of my quiz was just to demonstrate the increase in cd necessary to double the throw. Sometimes it might not be apparent for instance that something like the Smallsun ZY-C10-S At $14 only throws 1/3 less than the DBS aspheric at $89.