<p>How accurate are the practice tests, etc?</p>
<p>I know this doesn't answer your question, but the Princeton Review book was the best IMO. Better than Kaplan and Barrons.</p>
<p>I used the REA math IIC book (one week before the test, lol) and it seemed to be a pretty good predictor of my score. Good explanations and problems. Princeton Review seemed to be more about strategies and reviewing and didn't have as many practice tests. It's a good resource if you have enough time, but otherwise, forgo it. My only complaint with REA was that I didn't seem to have any issues with time constraints practicing with the REA book, but ran out of time on the actual test. Could've been the lack of sleep getting to a test center one hour away because of registration stupidity though. Good luck!</p>
<p>REA was really good IMHO
however,dont neglect BARRoNS</p>
<p>PR was crap</p>
<p>I liked PR ... I used many prep books though - I only used the REA book to do random problems here and there for practice.</p>
<p>I think that the REA book is the most accurate reflections of what the SATII Math IIC is like. I took a test from the Barrons book and I thought I was going to completely bomb the SATII Math IIC. I mean, after 60 minutes, I had only completed 35 problems... The REA book, however, gave me the confidence to step into the testing room. The problems were of medium difficulty and was a far more accurate indicator of what the real test was like.</p>
<p>Of course, I didn't really study from any of the books, just took the tests. So I am not sure how well each book goes over the basic formulas and strategies.</p>
<p>I actually have Barron's and REA. I figure if I run through some of the Barron's tests to toughen myself and then some REA tests for the "real" practice. I don't really plan to study because I'm not lacking in any major areas, I just need to get some practice in.</p>
<p>Good to know it isn't some horrible offbrand.</p>