I'd wager you can throw a 150g Valk further than max weight except maybe in stiff headwind.
I find this interesting.
I have a mechanical engineering background and see things very… scientific and nerd-like. So when looking at the flight of a disc, it would seem to me that a few statements would hold true:
1a. Lighter disc has less inertia, therefore can be accelerated at a higher rate.
1b. Heavier disc has more inertia, therefore cannot be accelerated at as high a rate.
However:
2a. Lighter disc has less inertia, therefore is affected by air resistance more (drag acts quicker on it) and can be slowed down easier
2b. Heavier disc has more inertia, therefore tends to hold its (albeit slightly lower) velocity longer.
So what I don't know, is if the difference in speed makes up for the difference in deceleration by air resistance. For instance, a whiffle ball can't be thrown nearly as far as a baseball, although it would be easier to reach higher arm speeds with a whiffle ball than a baseball. However, the human body cannot throw a shotput as far as a baseball, and can't healthily even "throw" it (like a baseball) for that matter - so there is a point of diminishing returns, and then regression.
So does the difference in weight result in more or less distance? Or would it change for professional level technique and power vs amateur level power?
Also.
3. Larger variation in speed over the course of the flight would result in more left to right movement, resulting in a less-straight overall flight of a lighter disc vs a heavier disc. However, gravity affects a heavier disc more, as its relatively equal lift is countered by its greater mass, so that would result in more fade. Another factor