I took Berkeley Review back in 2002, and although I did fairly well on the actual exam, I don't feel like the class was as good as everyone who'd recommended it to me made it out to be. Felt like the focus was too much on information when in reality most of the info needed is in the passage itself (aside from basic principles that you need to master). Plus, for the last 3 weeks leading up to the test, they stopped office hours because they did not want us to bombard the instructors with dumb, last-minute questions (paraphrased, but that was the reason). Maybe they've fixed that since then, but I felt that for over a grand, I was entitled to bug them if I needed assistance. And their own practice tests didn't feel like they were representative of what would be tested on a real version. A lot of the answers didn't make sense, especially Verbal in my mind. I heard ExamKrackers is the best for Verbal, but never tried it myself.
Now a reapplicant, so had to take the MCAT again. Second time around, studied from my old Berkeley Review books, and also used Princeton and Kaplan books from friends as well. No prep class that time. Overall, felt like Princeton's material was the best. Topics were laid out clearly but without too much extraneous information to get bogged down in. Kaplan's stuff still seemed poorly developed, and I didn't like it.
Maybe I'm not giving TBR enough credit from the first time, or maybe studying everything for the 3rd time (first in classes, then for MCAT v.1, then again for MCAT v.2) made stuff click better, but I improved a lot on that subsequent test (up 5 points). Part of me thinks luck had something to do with it, but I'm definitely not complaining.
Bottom line for me: a class is good for discipline, better understanding of what topics are/aren't covered on the MCAT. But, if you used Princeton materials, bought AAMC tests (much cheaper than a prep course), and remained diligent, you can do without.
