Which one's harder to get in your opinion?

Test Preparation
1

<p>A 2400 or a 36?</p>

2

<p>36 /10chars</p>

3

<p>2400 SAT. Almost twice as many people got a 36 ACT compared to a 2400 SAT in 2011 (about the same amount of people took each test)
<a href=“http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/SAT-Percentile-Ranks-Composite-CR-M-W-2011.pdf[/url]”>http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/SAT-Percentile-Ranks-Composite-CR-M-W-2011.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2011/pdf/profile/National2011.pdf[/url]”>http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2011/pdf/profile/National2011.pdf&lt;/a&gt; (12th page)</p>

<p>Out of 1.6 million test takers per test, 704 got a perfect ACT score while 384 got a perfect SAT score.</p>

4

<p>2400 definitely</p>

5

<p>But seeing as a great deal of colleges will supercore your SAT, the number of effective 2400’s is much higher than 384 (not statistically proven, but logically true, depending on one’s definition of “much higher”)
Also, seeing as the SAT is a sum, the true question should be "Which is harder; a 2400 or a 144 (straight 36’s). In this case, the 704 36’s are now much lower.
Then, when factoring in the fact that, on a ACT scale all 2390’s also count as 2400’s (2390/3 = 796.6,) which would get rounded up, meaning in the ACT’s view there would now be 588 2400’s, which combined with superscoring should be about equal to total 36’s, and higher than straight 36’s.</p>

<p>Either way, I found the ACT harder on practice tests, but had to take it for my state testing. I got a 2390 on the SAT and a 35 on the ACT (36R, 36S, 35M, 34E), and I think it’d be harder to get straight 36’s than straight 800’s, at least for me</p>

6

<p>A straight 36 > than a 2400 SAT. But simply a 36 (36/36/35/35) is easier than a 2400.</p>