Its hard to admit you are wrong, especially publicly.  But at the risk of confirming myself to be a flake, i will hereby say: the choice of medical school that I made was not the best for me.  Keyword here is for ME.  CIM is a really good school because: 1) I love all the professors I've met there except one, 2) The student body is composed of truly amazing, dedicated, brilliant individuals, and 3)  I think they are doing the best anyone can with the PBL model.

So what is the mistake?  The mistake was choosing PBL.  PBL is great, but not great for ME.  Let me explain the PBL process:
1)  Students meet to discuss a new topic.  We brainstorm for about 2 or 2.5 hours the various aspects of the new topic that we should study.  We then get a checklist of topics that we should actually study, and a reading assignment (sometimes from a book that is no longer in print, and then it is the students responsibility to hunt for it/copy it at the library, or use unspecified other books for his or her education).
2)  We meet the next day and discuss what we had read in detail.  The facilitator is silent and only interrupts if someone is wrong, or if we missed an issue or topic.  
3)  On rare occasions (3 hours a week or so?) we get crash-lectures on specific topics or an exam review.  Its not comprehensive, more like an overview than a real lecture.

Why I thought PBL would be a great way to learn for ME:
1) I thought that by having more time to read, I would be able to learn more.  i usually find most lecturers too slow, and i thought that at my own pace I would learn more, faster.
2) Integration of subjects by topic.  I thought that studying one system at a time from different aspects (biochemical, histological, physiological, etc) would give me a deeper understanding of the topics at hand.
3) With CIM in particular, I attributed their excellent board passing rate to their teaching ability.

Why I was wrong:
1) i assumed that I would be able to draw all the necessary conclusions, make all the necessary connections,  and fully understand what I was reading.  I am not sure if it's medical literature in general, or our books in particular, but understanding has been a partly elusive challenge.  Sometimes I remember the details, sometimes I dont.  but before the exam, I really don't have an understanding of what is more important, and what is less important.  Is it my fault?  perhaps.  Although i really (honestly!) am studying long hours and with full effort, i only know what I know.  And without looking ahead, some things may seem trivial now, and become crucial in later sections.  What I miss is the professor's guidance.  What i miss is emphasis.  What I miss is organisation.  What I miss is an accomplished mind helping young innocent minds see things in a better, more logical, or more useful way.  Rediscovering the wheel is fun too, but not helpful when there is so much yet to be learned in a short time...

2)  Integration of subject by topic didn't bring the additional layer of understanding to me.  The questions on the combined exam are not integrated between books.  In other words, some questions will ONLY ask about histo, others will ONLY ask about biochem.  Again, there are no lectures, and its up to the student to draw the structure-function parallels between the disciplines.  Sometimes I can, other times I miss it.  But I know that in a lecture setting i would get a lot more understanding.

3)  One should not under-appreciate the benefits of high expectations.  In that sense, CIM is a great institution.  But a lot of the students there are already... learned.  A good portion of the class went to Velez for undergraduate.  i hear them studying at the coffee shop sometimes, and they are talking (more shallowly) about the SAME THINGS THAT WE ARE STUDYING NOW.  While for me, cartillage was not a specially emphasized topic in undergrad bio, these kids already know the 12 types, where it is found, and general characteristics.  Of course med school is WAY deeper than med tech program.  But when it comes to PBL, having a background makes a HUGE difference.  You are able to at least roughly place all new information into previously learned categories.  The big issues are review, the learning is only at the detail level.  Now take someone whose pre-med included just the bare minimum: someone like me.  I got overwhelmed with the level of detail, and missed out on a lot of the big picture issues (that could have been elucidated in lecture...).

In short here is my opinion, subject to change as further facts come in:
If your background is strong, if you've had prior exposure to Anatomy, Histo, and Biochem, then PBL is a fantastic way to learn because it allows you to go deep, to practice talking about it with your classmates, and gives you a greater flexibility of study schedule than set lecture times.
However, if your pre-med is only basic, then many key concepts and connections will be lost in the self-study...err.. PBL method.  The amount of information will be overwhelming.  Medical school is not meant to be easy - and every free moment should be spent learning.  But without either the guidance of a professor, or previous preparatory knowledge to help organize issues and topics, the time spent organizing and placing information in its proper place will take away from studying.  

oh well, no use crying over spilled milk.  Have to make best with what i have.  But all you jokers who love to skip out on lecture in your schools - you are taking for granted what I have learned the hard way is a true priveledge and benefit!  And yes, I was a joker also.  Until now.