The feasibility of pre-equating, or establishing conversions from raw to scaled scores through the use of pretest data before operationally administering a test, was investigated for the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). Item-response theory based equating methods were used to estimate item parameters on SAT pretest data, instead of using final form SAT test results which were derived from multiple pretests. The verbal and mathematical sections of two SAT forms were calibrated from pretest data, pre-equated to existing SAT forms, and the pre-equating results were compared to final form item response theory equating and conventional linear equating methods. The results indicated that pre-equating of the two verbal test forms varied considerably. The equating for one form was found to be reasonably acceptable, while for the other it was marginally acceptable or unacceptable. This was explained by the location of reading passages and reading comprehension items at the end of the tests. The equating results were fairly similar for both forms of the mathematical test. They were considered only marginally acceptable, or perhaps unacceptable. Contributing reasons for this were not clear. Item difficulty was not consistent between pretests and the final test form. (GDC)