If I may stir the pot, just a little.
Background - did my SCPL/ATPL stuff back in the late 60s/early 70s. Taught the various subjects during the late 70s/early 80s and, for my sins and perverse interests, am back doing likewise these days. Some of us are just gluttons for punishment, I guess.
I suggest that
(a) the aircraft Type used in the exams matters not one iota - so long as it is a heavy jet or prop-jet and the exam requires the candidate to do the work, as opposed to airline flight planning where spoon-feeding is the go. It wouldn't really matter if the exam used an L188 or a B777 or, indeed, the old gentleman's aircraft as is the current flavour. The important thing is general understanding, knowledge and technical ability to figure out the answers.
(b) the theory exam ought not to be driven by practicality - that's for sim and line training/checking. The theory stuff provides an opportunity for the system to satisfy itself that the candidate does, indeed, have some sort of idea about what is what in running the sums sensibly. Ideally, it would be nice if the exams actually established a level of technical understanding. I make no comment as to whether I concur with the style and accuracy requirements of the exams these days - but that's just the path which the student/candidate has to follow and the phrase which readily comes to mind is "toughen up, sunshine".
(c) re comment in the thread about whether Brand A is preferable to Brand B or Brand C is fine - we all learn differently and we all respond better to different training techniques - if you get on better with Brand A, then use Brand A. Likewise Brand B, Brand C or whatever.
(d) learn the stuff and then practice, practice, practice. The exam material is not all that hard but, to get the pass, one has to handle the combination of a restrictive time limit and a high pass mark - that makes the exercise rather hard, no matter how one might look at it. Speed and accuracy is the buzz phrase here, I suggest.
(e) The issue these days is having the attitude of “I don’t need to know that, so I won’t learn it.” I have to admit that students with such an attitude do create more than a few problems for themselves.
As an afterthought, be aware that some of the various course notes around the place do have their errors although these don't appear to prevent folks gaining a pass along the road. For the aero engineer in me, though, it would be nice to think that those who purport to teach this stuff actually do have the requisite technical competence behind them to do so appropriately.