perfect act

<p>A perfect on the ACT is better in my opinion, just because there is no curve on the ACT, while on certain test dates it is possible to miss 2-3 on a certain section of the SAT and still get a "perfect" score....Also, the ACT has more sections.</p>

<p>Id take the 2400</p>

<p>yea I would, too, but that's probably because CC has swayed me...Statistically, it's way harder to get a 36 on the ACT, which would mean it should be more desired. In the midwest, we (excluding me, of course) think that the ACT is the only thing that matters, while in New England, they think the SAT is the only thing that matters...I'd take both.</p>

<p>Is it still harder statistically to get a 36 than a 2400 even when they added a section?</p>

<p>Is a 36 ACT as good as a 4000 SATI/II combo?""</p>

<p>a 4000!!
whoever gets a 4000 must be pretty crazy</p>

<p>Or just...bad at math</p>

<p>bad at math?
3x800 + 1600 = 4000
or 2x800 + 2400 = 4000</p>

<p>unless you meant something else or were being sarcastic...</p>

<p>36 ACT Vs. 4800 SAT combo</p>

<p>SAT Combo wins anyday...</p>

<p>Im not sure. At first I thought 4800 but then I realized 4000 is right but I posted it anyway because I felt like it.</p>

<p>Blackbeltcdjunkie </p>

<p>Nosga. 36 ACT is harder to get, and the test itself is scientifically significant (where the SAT isn't--ask any psychologist).</p>

<p>Nosga? yea i said 36 is harder to get than a 2400, but I'd rather have a 2400, 800, 800, 800 than a 36 composite</p>

<p>I was only referring to your post that said the "SAT Combo wins anyday", which is not true. Math IIC is an absolute joke and is much easier than the ACT Math section. Plus, the ACT english usage, reading, and writing sections are far more comprehensive than the SAT I english sections, even when accompianied by the SAT II Lit.</p>

<p>Plus, isn't it only 2400,800,800 now? (With the SAT II Writing being gone, universities will probably only require two SAT II's for those who wrote the SAT I...)</p>

<p>i'm pretty sure they still want 3; I could be wrong, though. I'd still take a 2400, 800x2(or 3) over a 36 composite.</p>

<p>If you can get a 36 on the ACt, more than likely you can score a 2400 on the SAT. Do both, and find out! :)</p>

<p>"Nosga. 36 ACT is harder to get, and the test itself is scientifically significant (where the SAT isn't--ask any psychologist)."</p>

<p>Nonsense. The SAT was created by a psychologist at Princeton.</p>

<p>glucose101, I got a 36, but not a 2400, and I spent a comparable amount of time studying for both. Either I was very lucky on the ACT, or the perfect on the SAT is harder.</p>

<p>what about a 35? how does that compare to the sat? like 2350?</p>

<p>I think the 2350 is better, but can with those scores, I would send both (can you?)</p>

<p>Thing with the ACT is, missing one question on the Science portion can bring you from a 36 to a 34 on that portion. Then you cannot miss any questions on any of the other three sections, in order to get a composite of 36. It's really difficult to get a perfect ACT score, especially as one of the other people brought up, that there aren't many good ACT prep books or classes as the SAT does. </p>

<p>You can send both SAT and ACT scores (you'll end up sending your SAT score anyways; Collegeboard reports both SAT II and SAT I scores on the same report, I believe). It just costs more to send an extra ACT report.</p>

<p>how about 2280-2290 ish? liek 34?</p>