On this page
What this practice test covers
The real LSAT has four 35-minute multiple-choice sections: two scored Logical Reasoning sections, one scored Reading Comprehension section, and one unscored section you can't identify. This practice test gives you the three that count:
- Logical Reasoning — Section 1: 25 questions, 35 minutes.
- Reading Comprehension: 27 questions on four passage sets, including one comparative-reading pair (Passage A / Passage B), 35 minutes.
- Logical Reasoning — Section 2: 25 questions, 35 minutes.
- Argumentative Writing: one debatable issue with three perspectives, 50 minutes (15 prewriting + 35 writing), self-scored with a sample essay and rubric.
The Logical Reasoning sections mix every major question family—assumptions, strengthen and weaken, flaws, inferences, principles, parallel reasoning, method, main conclusion, role, disagreement, paradox, and evaluate—with easier questions first and harder ones concentrated in the middle and later part of each section. Every question has five answer choices and is original: written to match the official style, not copied from a real LSAT.
How to use it: exam mode vs. practice mode
Exam mode is the closest thing to test day: a 35-minute timer per section, no feedback until the end, and the ability to flag questions and come back. Take the sections in one sitting and use a 10-minute break after the second section, just like the real intermission. Practice on a computer if you can; the real test is digital.
Practice mode shows the answer and explanation after each question. Use it when you're learning a question type, not when you're measuring yourself.
How the real LSAT is scored
On the real LSAT, your raw score is the number of questions you answer correctly across the scored sections—there's no penalty for wrong answers—and LSAC converts it to the 120–180 scale using a conversion set for that test form. Because this isn't an official form, we don't convert your results to a 120–180 score. You'll see percent correct overall and by section, and every question in the review list is tagged with its type (Flaw, Necessary Assumption, Main Point, and so on)—more useful for deciding what to study next anyway.
The writing task isn't scored on the real test either. LSAC requires an approved writing sample on file before it releases your score, and law schools read the essay. Compare yours with the sample response and check it against the rubric.
What to do after you finish
- Sort your misses by question type. Filter the review list to incorrect answers and tally the question-type tag on each one. Two or three types usually account for most lost points.
- Read every explanation—including for questions you got right by guessing. Each one explains why the correct answer works and why the most tempting wrong answer fails.
- Study the weak spots. For LR, work through the relevant section of our Logical Reasoning guide; for passages, use the Reading Comprehension guide.
- Retest on official material. Take a free official PrepTest on LawHub under full timing to see how your work transfers.
Free official practice
LSAC offers four full four-section PrepTests free through LawHub, in the same interface you'll use on test day. For the 2026–27 cycle, LSAC updated every PrepTest in the LawHub library to its new testing interface. LawHub also has sample Argumentative Writing prompts. Use our test for original extra practice and the official tests to benchmark—see the LSAT overview for dates, fees, and format details, or browse all our free practice tests.
Sample questions
5 questions from this practice test, with answers and explanations. Take the full test above for timing, scoring and your weakest domains.
Researchers studying a songbird species noticed that birds nesting beside a busy highway began their dawn songs about twenty minutes earlier than birds of the same species nesting in a quiet forest a few kilometers away. The researchers concluded that traffic noise causes the birds to start singing earlier, presumably so that their songs can be heard before the morning rush drowns them out.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the researchers' argument?
- A. Streetlights along the highway keep the roadside brightly lit all night, and artificial light at night is known to trigger early singing in this species.
- B. The birds nesting near the highway sing at a higher pitch than the birds nesting in the forest.
- C. Traffic on the highway is heaviest between 7 and 9 a.m.
- D. Some songbird species do not sing at dawn at all.
- E. The highway birds and the forest birds were observed during the same weeks of the breeding season.
Show answerHide answer
A is correct. The argument spots a difference between two groups (earlier singing) and blames one difference between their locations (noise). A points to a second difference—all-night artificial light—that is known to produce exactly the observed effect. Now noise isn't the only candidate cause.
E is the trap because it sounds like it's about the study's method, but it rules out a seasonal explanation, so it actually strengthens the argument. C fits the noise story, B is about pitch rather than timing, and D is about other species.
Nutritionist: Many parents give their children apple juice in place of soda, believing the switch is a healthy one. But a typical serving of apple juice contains nearly as much sugar as a serving of cola of the same size. So parents who replace their children's soda with apple juice are doing little to reduce the amount of sugar their children consume.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the nutritionist's argument depends?
- A. Apple juice has no nutritional advantages over soda.
- B. Sugar is the only unhealthy ingredient in soda.
- C. Children who switch from soda to apple juice do not drink much smaller amounts of juice than they previously drank of soda.
- D. Most parents are unaware of how much sugar apple juice contains.
- E. Apple juice is the kind of fruit juice that children drink most often.
Show answerHide answer
C is correct. The evidence is about sugar per serving; the conclusion is about total sugar consumed. Negate C: if kids who switch drink far less juice than they used to drink soda, their total sugar intake drops substantially—and the conclusion falls apart. That makes C necessary.
A is the trap. The conclusion is only about sugar, so the argument doesn't care whether juice has vitamins. B, D, and E likewise aren't needed: the argument works even if soda has other bad ingredients, even if parents know the sugar content, and regardless of which juice is most popular.
The board of the Harmon Foundation is choosing a new director for the foundation's research institute. Everyone who has received the foundation's senior fellowship has published original research. Priya Raman has taught at three universities and has served on several editorial boards, but she has never published any original research. So Priya Raman is not eligible to become the institute's director.
The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
- A. Anyone who has published original research is eligible to become the institute's director.
- B. Only people who have received the foundation's senior fellowship are eligible to become the institute's director.
- C. Teaching at several universities is not by itself enough to make someone eligible to become the institute's director.
- D. Everyone who is eligible to become the institute's director has taught at a university.
- E. Anyone who has received the foundation's senior fellowship is eligible to become the institute's director.
Show answerHide answer
B is correct. With B, the chain runs: eligible → received the fellowship → published original research. Raman hasn't published, so she hasn't received the fellowship, so she isn't eligible. The conclusion is guaranteed.
E is the trap—it reverses B. Saying fellowship recipients are eligible tells you nothing about people without the fellowship. A has the same problem with publishing. C leaves open that Raman is eligible through some other combination of qualifications, and D is a requirement she already meets.
When the ride-hailing company Zipline raised its per-mile fares in the city of Marlow by 15 percent, the number of rides taken with Zipline in Marlow did not decline; in fact, it rose slightly. Nonetheless, Zipline's total revenue from rides in Marlow fell over the following six months. Zipline made no other changes to its Marlow fares during that period.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?
- A. Zipline's main competitor in Marlow did not raise its fares during the same period.
- B. Zipline raised its fares by similar percentages in several other cities at the same time.
- C. Many of Zipline's regular riders in Marlow complained publicly about the fare increase.
- D. Zipline's costs of operating in Marlow rose during the six months after the fare increase.
- E. During the six months after the fare increase, rides taken with Zipline in Marlow were, on average, much shorter than rides taken before the increase.
Show answerHide answer
E is correct. Fares are charged per mile. If the average ride got much shorter, each ride brought in less money even at the higher rate—so more rides and higher per-mile prices can coexist with lower total revenue.
D is the classic trap: costs affect profit, not revenue. A would, if anything, predict fewer rides, which didn't happen. B and C don't touch Marlow's revenue at all.
Horticulturist: A cutting from a Marisol vine will take root only if it is kept in soil that stays warmer than 20°C and it receives no direct midday sun. The cuttings in Greenhouse 3 have been kept in soil that has never dropped below 22°C, and the greenhouse's shading system keeps all direct midday sun off them. So the cuttings in Greenhouse 3 will take root.
The reasoning in the horticulturist's argument is flawed because the argument
- A. presumes without justification that the greenhouse's shading system works as intended
- B. relies on a claim about Marisol vines in general to draw a conclusion about particular cuttings
- C. fails to consider that soil temperatures above 20°C might benefit other kinds of plants as well
- D. treats conditions that are sufficient for an outcome as if they were required for that outcome
- E. treats conditions that are required for an outcome as if they were enough to guarantee that outcome
Show answerHide answer
E is correct. "Will take root only if" introduces necessary conditions. Meeting them means the cuttings can take root, not that they will—they might still fail from disease, poor watering, or anything else.
D is the trap: it describes the reverse error. A isn't a flaw because the argument states outright that the shading system keeps all direct sun off the cuttings. B describes a perfectly legitimate move—applying a general rule to particular cases—and C is irrelevant.
More LSAT guides
The LSAT in 2026–27: What’s on It and How to Prep
The LSAT is now a reading-and-reasoning test: two scored Logical Reasoning sections, one scored Reading Comprehension…
Read Book picksBest LSAT Prep Books for 2026–27
Official practice first, one good strategy book second, and nothing that wastes your time on Logic Games.
Read GuideLSAT Logical Reasoning Guide
Logical Reasoning is two of your three scored LSAT sections. Learn to read arguments the way the test writers do and…
Read GuideLSAT Reading Comprehension Guide
Reading Comprehension is one of your three scored LSAT sections: four dense passage sets in 35 minutes.
ReadFrequently asked questions
Is this a full-length LSAT?
It includes all three scored sections at real length and timing, plus the writing task. It leaves out the unscored variable section, which doesn't count toward your score on the real test.
Why doesn’t this practice test give me a 120–180 score?
LSAC sets a raw-to-scaled conversion for each official test form. Any conversion applied to unofficial questions would be a guess, so we report percent correct overall and by section instead, with every question tagged by type in the review.
Are these real LSAT questions?
No. Every question here is original, written to mirror the official format, difficulty, and question types. For real released questions, use LSAC's free PrepTests on LawHub.
Does this practice test include Logic Games?
No, because the real LSAT doesn't anymore. Analytical Reasoning was removed starting with the August 2024 test.
Sources & official links
- LSAC — Types of LSAT Questionslsac.org
- LSAC — LSAT Scoringlsac.org