Again, questions were not difficult but I ran out of time. 90 q's in only 60 minutes is pretty grueling and leaves no time to double check answers. I have a habit of making random dumb errors so not having review time at the end really sucked. To prepare, I used Crack PAT. I did the first 5 tests untimed, getting a 21 on the very first one but used up 64 seconds per question. On the second I had the same score but was down to 45 seconds. I went below 40 seconds for the remaining tests and my score generally increased every time, and by test 5 the only questions I was missing were angle ranking. I also had a copy of Barron's DAT that contained 2 practice tests. While most of the book was riddled with errors, the PAT section was pretty useful and alone justified the purchase.
Be aware that the real deal is somewhat more difficult than Crack on most sections. Keyholes were subtle, and many looked like more than one answer would be correct. In TFE, I often had to visualize objects in 3D on the real thing instead of relying on line counting, which worked almost every time in Crack. Paper folding was comparable, except that I got this weird 1/3 fold on a question. Angles were maybe somewhat easier on the real thing, and cube counting was comparable. Pattern folding was more difficult, and several figures were very small and I had to glue my eyes to the screen to see certain subtleties. There were several obvious "experimental" questions that had faulty answer choices.
