PAT-hole punching, cube counting etc

[molar3]

---

Members do not see this ad.

For those who have already taken the DAT,
did you feel hole punching was more like top score or like CDP? ive been seeing that topscore punches seem alot simpler, not as intricate as CDP. same with cube counting, it seems more straight forward on top score. CDP pattern folding seems to be easier than top score (to me personally)
Any thoughts? Thanks in advance!

 

[Nontrad37]

I just finished DAT this morning.

The hole punches is a little more trickier than KBP and Barron. I didn't do TOPSCORE nor CDP. The folding is quite unusual. I spent more time on hole punches than I did for the practice tests. One draw back of the real test is that you cannot write on the screen, have to draw it on the little board provided for you. It took some extra time.

Cube counting is quite plain and easy. My strategy for cube counting is:

1. Count the number of tubes, write it down.
2. Count the painted surface of each tube, write them down in a column.
3. Count the numbers you wrote down and see if it matches the total tube number in step 1.
4. The rest is easy, just count for 1s, 2s, 3s...etc.

It works for me. Once you get used to it, very fast and accurate. The merit is you only need to count the painted surface once.

 

[timwatley]

I have CDP and Top Score and just took the DAT yesterday. The hole punching isn't as hard as CDP but it's a little bit harder than Top Score - meaning you'll get a good amount of basic folds but they throw in a few "half hole punches".

Cube counting is easy after you figure out a method that works for you.

Angles was JUST like CDP. A few angle problems had unequal legs but most were exactly like CDP.

Hope that helped some

 

[NomNomNom]

I have CDP and Top Score and just took the DAT yesterday. The hole punching isn't as hard as CDP but it's a little bit harder than Top Score - meaning you'll get a good amount of basic folds but they throw in a few "half hole punches".

Cube counting is easy after you figure out a method that works for you.

Angles was JUST like CDP. A few angle problems had unequal legs but most were exactly like CDP.

Hope that helped some

Agreed.

One or two of the hole punching were some pretty crazy folds, I tell ya.
Just be prepared to see a new one on the real DAT.

Cube counting is easy. Just write down the numbers 1,2,3,4,5 and tally each of the cubes in each of these categories. (unless if the problem only has 2 questions for it) No tricks (like some in CDP).

Angles is similar to CDP. Some are very obvious, but some are purrrdy hard.

 

[lusity]

I didn't purchase topscore, so I can't say much about it. However, I used CDP, and my CDP average was identical to my actual PAT score on the DAT.

Orthographic Projections- Same level of difficulty

TFE: Same, maybe even easier.

Angles: This section was hard. All my angles looked like they were within 1degree of each other. It is probably as hard, if not harder, than CDP.

Hole Punching: If you can get a perfect score on this section on CDP, you can do this section with ease on the real DAT. This section was really simple. I went through it in about 5 minutes.

Cube Counting: Very easy. None of the figures had more than 20cubes, so CDP is definitely overkill with their 30+cube figures. No illusions, very straightforward. I even had time to go back and recount my cubes (I went through it pretty fast the first time around for fear that I wouldn't have enough time).

Paper Folding: On the real DAT, this section is most different from CDP. CDP has a lot of those black/white colored ones to mess with you while the real DAT has more strange paper folds versus normal paper folds but different prints/designs.