JT,
The examinations are changing rapidly. EASA are filling the QBs at pace to make "learn and dump" increasingly difficult. I did all 14 last year and was appalled by the standard of some of the questions; rather than being used to elicit essential information there were dozens that were deliberately phrased to be obtuse and ambiguous. Some were also clearly translated from another ICAO language. The value of the QBs was recognising these shockers if they turned up in your exam. Overall, several of the RW papers were lazy recasts of FW papers. The Met paper had loads about upper winds and jet streams and almost nothing about, for example, mountain effects. I also learnt a lot doing them, but the balance needs to be struck between a reasonable examination of expected essential knowledge and a growing perception that EASA are both raising revenue through resits and driving training down some very narrow routes for future commercial pilots.