I was in the same situation.  I was first licensed in 10/2001.  New job required the 66.  I took it and passed on 8/16/2005.

The exam has a lot of crossover from the 63.  It is mostly rules and regs.

80% of the test is Ethics and Legal Guidelines

20% of the test is Investment Analysis, Recommendations, and Strategies

Thanks for the reply. Just a little concerned I guess since it’s been a few years since I tested. I hate tests anyway. Thanks again.

Tests stink.  There are a few here (or who used to be here) that will judge the entire content of your character by your test score.  That is shallow.  Those are also the people who are failures in this business.

I took the 7 at 6 weeks and got a 75 they gave me 2 weeks to study for the 66 and I got a 78.  That was in early June 2005.

Difference I saw was in the wording of the questions.  The 66 was tricky.  The 7 was straightforward.  Take the 66 as close to the 7 as you can.  There is repeated material.

ALWAYS CHOOSE THE ANSWER THAT DOES THE BEST THING FOR THE CLIENT.

GOOD LUCK.

what meno said, exactly! Same situation, I had to take 66 for new job. Not too bad a test.

Maybeeeeee

You're right, tests do stink. And there will always be people who judge, thankfully I've been given a thick skin and it doesn't bother me.  I liked when I passed my 7 with a 79 and someone at my firm said "you studied nine pts to much."  I'm taking the 66 exam on Sept. 1st and I've been studying the material for about three weeks now.  You're also right about the tricky questions. The Dearborn disk exams have some very crafty wording in their questions. Funny thing is I've found some serious errors in the questions in the Dearborn material and what they claim is the correct answer. I called them and while they acknowledge they're there, they have a real "so what" attitute about it. Nice huh.

Interestin cend.  Do you remember any of the questions??

Guy in our office changed one question last week and got a 71 ! 

In general, you should NEVER go back and change an answer unless you are POSITIVE you now know the correct answer.

Maybeeeeeeeee,

Yeah, here's one of my favorites:

The term investment advisor representative includes which of the following:

I. A receptionist for an advisor

II. Someone who solicits new business for an advisor

III. A supervisor who oversees employees that manage client portfolios for an advisor.

IV. An investment advisory firm registered in the state of Texas.

Of course I picked II. & III. but Dearborn says the correct answer is <?:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /> I. & II.  That's just one of several I've found. I'm collecting them to send to Dearborn.

And yes I learned that on the 7 you don't change your answers, your first choice is typically correct. At least the guy in your office passed, I'm sure he's relieved.

cend ~

I just started studying for the 66 with Dearborne material and just read your post.  I can't believe that Dearborne doesn't seem to care that they have incorrect answers.  Did you ever talk to them after compiling all of the bad questions?  Should I get another book? I took the 7 back in June, so I am a bit rusty. Thanks.

~Andromeda

[quote=cend]

Maybeeeeeeeee,

Yeah, here's one of my favorites:

The term investment advisor representative includes which of the following:

I. A receptionist for an advisor

II. Someone who solicits new business for an advisor

III. A supervisor who oversees employees that manage client portfolios for an advisor.

IV. An investment advisory firm registered in the state of Texas.

Of course I picked II. & III. but Dearborn says the correct answer is <?:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /> I. & II.  That's just one of several I've found. I'm collecting them to send to Dearborn.

And yes I learned that on the 7 you don't change your answers, your first choice is typically correct. At least the guy in your office passed, I'm sure he's relieved.

[/quote]

Priceless!!! That stinks.  What is really learned from that.

Hate the way things are questioned.  During the CFP exams I had a
problem with the way a question was written and was told it is my
responsibility to anticipate what they are asking.  Well when the
question isn’t in the form of a question, how in the hell am I supposed
to anticipate it?  They had a statement and four more statements
that were supposed to be answers.  Complete idiocy.

Why not save yourself some trouble and get the 65 instead?  The 66 is a combination of the 63 & 65, you already have the 63.  I studied for about five days and passed the 65.

I was in your same situation with my 7 & 63.

You might ask about it at your work.  The 65 was pretty easy I thought.

I thought the 65 was more comprehensive? It has more questions. I have the S7 and 63 shouldn’t I take the 66? I know I can take the 65 but again I thought the 65 was tougher (some S7 stuff) and more questions?

Derek, you are absolutely correct. All one has to do is look at the study manuals for the 65 & 66.  I ordered the 65 materials in error while all my mates got the much smaller 66 study guide and laughed at me.  We all passed, but I felt a little foolish after I saw the differences in the materials.

I doubt if the 65 is easier than the 66, but then again, at least I wasn't foolish enough to take them both, so I really dont have a legitimate comparison for you.