Three models of flow resistance (a Keulegan-type logarithmic law and two models developed for large-scale roughness conditions: the full logarithmic law and a model based on an inflectional velocity profile) were calibrated, validated and compared using an extensive database (N = 1,533) from rivers and flumes, representative of a wide hydraulic and geomorphologic range in the field of gravel-bed and mountain channels. It is preferable to apply the model based on an inflectional velocity profile in the relative submergence (y/d90) interval between 0.5 and 15, while the full logarithmic law is preferable for values below 0.5. For high relative submergence, above 15, either the logarithmic law or the full logarithmic law can be applied. The models fitted to the coarser percentiles are preferable to those fitted to the median diameter, owing to the higher explanatory power achieved by setting a model, the smaller difference in the goodness-of-fit between the different models and the lower influence of the origin of the data (river or flume).