<p>1+2=3, right?</p>
<p>As someone on the West Coast who still hasn't left for his testing center...</p>
<p>I suggest you keep quiet for a while yet. ;)</p>
<p>Lucky you I already took Math Level 2.</p>
<p>Yeah. You are supposed to wait 24 hours I believe. =]</p>
<p>Wait, so people on the west coast don't ruin our curve</p>
<p>You should probably edit your post, so more people don't see it. :)</p>
<p>kind of disappointed, on a practice i answered 47 and got 800. today, i answered only 43 so assuming everything is right i can get an 800 max unless the curve is a little bit more generous like when i took the math1 in may.</p>
<p>I found it hard. On collegeboard's 2 practice tests I got 790 and 800. This time, I think I only got 750+ depending on the curve.</p>
<p>It wasn't hard. It was just that there wasn't enough time... I guess you could call that hard. :) I think I'll get 780+</p>
<p>yea i agree, it's just the time pressure thats a killer. i think i'll get 780+ as well. i knew roughly 45, guessed on about 5</p>
<p>"...unless the curve is a little bit more generous like when i took the math1 in may"
How generous was the curve? I just took Math IC and I'm really worried.</p>
<p>Yea...it probably was the time. I mean most of the questions weren't so challenging but the time...I skipped one question..something I never do.</p>
<p>math 1 curve is extremely hard, you have to get everything right for 800</p>
<p>I thought it was really easy, I studied using Barron's and on that I could barely get 40 right. This was a cakewalk compared to Barron's</p>
<p>It wasn't harder. There was just not enough time. I usually finished my practice tests in 56 - 57 minutes and today i finished right in time.
I skipped 2 but i have doubts for some others . When can we start discussing ? Do you have any idea how is the curve going to be ?</p>
<p>damn for the second last question i put 96 +8I instead of 97 + 8i. ****tt i am not going to get an 800</p>
<p>do you guys want to make a chat? </p>
<p>go to chatroom: Math2C</p>
<p>For the cone question was the depth 2.0?</p>
<p>nope
it was 1.6</p>
<p>the answer I got was that the depth was half the original</p>
<p>Yea thats what I got too. 4/2=2</p>