The tests from like 2000 to atleast 2003 have much easier curves. I see myself getting 15-18 wrong and still being in the upper 160s. Should that not be a correct indicator of performance on newer tests. Should we evaluate based on raw scores instead?

More specifically, the older LR hence 2000-2003 have been killin me.

So, do you think that the result of the easier LR has led to a harsher curve? B/C rc and lg have been the same. The only difference i'm getting with taking the older tests is more wrong on LR. However my scores even out because of the easier curve.

any thoughts

i would focus on the more recent practice exams as they are more likely to resemble the actual exam in Oct. Where are you appling to?

I agree, focusing on the more recent stuff makes a difference, its what i did.