<p>Ive only heard of people doing better or the same on the ACT than the SAT, but never worse. I was wondering if someone has done worse, and what the two scores were. Also, what did you think of the ACT when you were taking it, did u think it was harder/easier than the SAT.</p>
<p>I did worse in the writing section, but that's about it.</p>
<p>ACT English = 29, SAT Writing = 800</p>
<p>I like the SAT better, but the ACT is easier for most people.</p>
<p>I got a 32 on the ACT (SAT Equiv-1430) and my best combined score on the SAT is 1510...Although I went into the ACT stone cold, having never even taken a practice test...</p>
<p>Although I haven't received my ACT scores yet, I know that they will be much lower than my SAT scores. I think I got 30+ on English, Reading, Math, but like a 20 on the science section. It was absolutely horrible. I ran out of time on pretty much every section. I'll take the SAT over the ACT anyday.</p>
<p>The conversion charts are based on students who took both tests. So those who did better on the ACT had to be balanced by those who did better on the SAT.</p>
<p>I've seen other threads where people reported doing better on the SAT.</p>
<p>I know someone w/a 28 ACT vs 2050 SAT.</p>
<p>I took a practice test on the ACT for the hell of it and score in the 20s in a few subjects. I concentrated on the SAT from then on.</p>
<p>I did a LOT worse. I got a 29 on the ACT and a 2100 on the SAT. Go figure. If I used a proportion, with my 29, I should have gotten a 1930 on the SAT. But I didn't! Hurrah!</p>
<p>I have a 30 ACT vs a 2180 SAT....waiting on my Oct ACT though. I thought the ACT test itself was much easier, go figure.</p>
<p>I don't have my scores yet, but I have a sort of bad feeling about it. I need a 29 or 30 to be equivalent to my SATs.</p>