I think @.hopkins is over exaggerating. It will obviously be a lot of work, but I would say December is 100% feasible, even with less than 30 hours per week. If I were you I would use the two curriculums concurrently. It could help you to see things from two different perspectives and decide which way is easier for you to think about the questions, and then form thinking habits to always think in that way.

Studying for the LSAT is a lot of work no matter what, but I see the same few people always posting about how insanely time consuming and exhausting it is, and I think that's a huge discouragement to people. Of course preparing for this test is a lot of work, and I think everyone knows that. But saying that it takes minimum X hours a week, minimum X PTs, minimum X weeks, etc really makes people think that if they don't have that kind of time or resources they will not be able to do it. Everyone has different capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses. Maybe some people can raise their score 10 points in 3 months, and it will take someone else 6 months or a year. Giving these harsh ultimatums make people lose confidence and think they cannot accomplish what they are working so hard for, and we all know that confidence is such an asset on the LSAT.

Please, continue to give advice and share your experiences, but don't make it seem like just because you had a certain experience with a certain study method, etc it will be the same for everyone. Just because it took you a year to improve 10 points doesn't mean it will take everyone else that long. Just because you studied for 40 hours a week doesn't mean others will have to to see the same improvement. Just because you've done 40 practice tests doesn't mean others will need to do the same amount to see the same improvements.

All in all, I think that those giving advice need to make sure they aren't being negative and absolute about what is possible. Anything is possible.