actex or arch?

[ckim]

I checked the polls between these two manuals and it was almost a tie. I was wondering what the CONS were of these two manuals. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems as though they are considered to be much more informational in regards to the syllabus of exam M when compared to the other manuals.

[ckim]

I forgot to mention, that I will also be using the ASM manual to help prepare for this upcoming exam.

[FireBoy]

I don't know how Arch-M is, but when I used Arch-3, I considered it to be lacking, mainly because they presented most things as fact. Actex, on the other hand, generally shows the derivation of the formulas presented to make them easier to understand/memorize. You'll also find that the Actex manual has more sample problems to work (again, my experience was with Arch-3 - I don't know how Arch-M compares. I suspect the content is different, but I doubt he's changed his way of presenting things).

Good luck!

[Woody]

For what it's worth, I failed this exam too many times, then I got the Actex manual and passed. I contribute my passing to 30% being familiar with the material from past studying and 70% to Actex for helping me really understand it and allowing me to finally pass this wretched exam.

My vote is for Actex, but only for Exam M. There are different authors for Actex for the other exams and, in my opinion, not very good at explaining the material.

[oski]

Read posts by Wat? (he is a user in case you don't know) based on what he says you should get both Actex and Arch...


I have old Actex for Course 3 and it backs what everyone says about it...

I'm working through Arch as introduction and then Actex for polishing....

just my $0.02....

[ckim]

I already purchased ASM, mainly for all of the problems. I can only afford one more manual in my budget. I think I am going to go with Actex. Thanks for the input.

[Actuarias]

Do we really need two study manuals for M?

[ckim]

Well, I personally feel like I need two manuals for exam M (i have no knowledge on exam m material prior to studying for exam m). Although ASM has plenty of questions, I feel as though it is not as informational as other manuals. By the way, I ordered Actex, and hopefully it'll come by this week.

[oski]

Originally Posted by Actuarias

Do we really need two study manuals for M?

I think most people have at least two for this exam. But then there are those that just go in and pass without any manuals... Odds are you're somewhere in between....

[mlschop]

Originally Posted by oski

I think most people have at least two for this exam. But then there are those that just go in and pass without any manuals... Odds are you're somewhere in between....

I have two (ASM & Arch) because...well...my employer will reimburse for two on first try, so I might as well, right?

Seriously though, i will probably only use ASM because i really like the way it's presented - and the # of problems. If I pass - then I'll prolly have never looked at Arch at all (well...maybe if I get confused, I can see how Arch describes things...)

Getting a study manual & the texts might be better for reference purposes.

I think most people get multiple guides because there will inevitably be SOMETHING that you get confused by in one...which might be cleared up by the other.