Kim and Opfer (2017) found that number-line estimates increased approximately logarithmically with number when an upper bound (e.g., 100 or 1000) was explicitly marked (bounded condition) and when no upper bound was marked (unbounded condition). Using procedural suggestions from Cohen and Ray (2020), we examined whether this logarithmicity might come from restrictions on the response space provided. Consistent with our previous findings, logarithmicity was evident whether tasks were bounded or unbounded, with the degree of logarithmicity tied to the numerical value of the estimates rather than the response space per se. We also found a clear log-to-linear shift in numerical estimates. Results from Bayesian modeling supported the idea that unbounded tasks are qualitatively similar to bounded ones, but unbounded ones lead to greater logarithmicity. Our findings support the original findings of Kim and Opfer (2017) and extend their generality to more age groups and more varieties of number-line estimation. [This paper was published in "Developmental Psychology" v56 n4 p853-860 2020 (EJ1246394). For the article, "Experimental Bias in Number-Line Tasks and How to Avoid Them: Comment on Kim and Opfer (2017) and the Introduction of the Cohen Ray Number-Line Task," see EJ1246392.]