Look guys, you can ask questions like "why did I miss x questions and get score y from Testprep company 1 when I missed p questions and got score q from Testprep company 2" all day long and you will not get the answer you want. What you will see is reps from these respective test prep companies post over and over again that their test prep software is the best representation of the actual test no matter what "evidence" you lay out. And you'll see other posters post more and more of their personal stats and how it compares to yours. Bottom line - if you're mildly curious on how others have scored and their breakdown and check this thread when taking a break from studying to relax your brain, fine. If you're genuinely trying to figure out answers to certain algorithms or expect test prep companies reps to EXPLAIN why their software spewed out a score different from what you thought you'd get, what do you honestly think the responses will be?
My personal view: Knewton
provides a good course and good practice questions and completely random scoring. Manhattan GMAT
has great quant and terrible verbal (to the point it doesn't even make sense). People swear by GMATPrep and how representative it is, but I didn't see such "almost perfect" resemblance. Someone else will either share my views, or have completely different views. People say Kaplan
tests are harder, but you would be fool to assume say 100 points higher than your actual GMAT.
Don't get me wrong - I've posted threads or responded to threads with my score breakdowns too just to see how it compares with everyone else. What I advice against (and I see some people do this) and to ask over and over again the same questions in different forms trying to figure out how they are actually doing. You won't know until the day of the test. And until then, try to spend more energy drilling down the fundamentals and less time analyzing score algorithms.