At a delivery depot, some parcels currently loaded onto Van Cedar are

Question

At a delivery depot, some parcels currently loaded onto Van Cedar are moved to Van Maple before the vans leave for their routes. If no other parcels are added to or removed from either van, then after the transfer, will Van Cedar have more parcels than Van Maple?

(1) After the transfer, Van Cedar will have 33 1/3% fewer parcels than it had before the transfer.
(2) After the transfer, Van Maple will have 100% more parcels than it had before the transfer.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

GMAT Club Official Solution:

At a delivery depot, some parcels currently loaded onto Van Cedar are moved to Van Maple before the vans leave for their routes. If no other parcels are added to or removed from either van, then after the transfer, will Van Cedar have more parcels than Van Maple?

(1) After the transfer, Van Cedar will have 33 1/3% fewer parcels than it had before the transfer.

This tells us only that the number of parcels moved from Van Cedar was one-third of Van Cedar’s original load. Since no information is given about Van Maple’s original load, this statement is not sufficient.

(2) After the transfer, Van Maple will have 100% more parcels than it had before the transfer.

This tells us only that the number of parcels moved to Van Maple was equal to Van Maple’s original load. Since no information is given about Van Cedar’s original load, this statement is not sufficient.

(1)+(2) Let x parcels be moved from Van Cedar to Van Maple.

From (1), x is 1/3 of Van Cedar’s original load, so Van Cedar originally had 3x parcels.

From (2), x is equal to Van Maple’s original load, since increasing Van Maple’s load by 100% means adding its original number of parcels. So Van Maple originally had x parcels.

After the transfer:

Van Cedar has 3x - x = 2x
Van Maple has x + x = 2x

So Van Cedar will not have more parcels than Van Maple. Thus, the answer to the question is NO. Sufficient.

Answer: C.

AdarshSambare · Answer

Let initial parcels be: Cedar = C, Maple = M, and x parcels moved from Cedar to Maple.
After transfer:
Cedar = C − x
Maple = M + x
We need to know if C − x > M + x.
(1) Cedar has 33 1/3% fewer parcels ⇒ loses 1/3 of C ⇒ x = C/3.
So Cedar = 2C/3, Maple = M + C/3.
Compare: 2C/3 ? M + C/3 ⇒ C/3 ? M
 We don’t know relation between C and M  
 ⇒ insufficient.

(2) Maple has 100% more ⇒ doubles ⇒ M + x = 2M ⇒ x = M.
So Cedar = C − M, Maple = 2M.
Compare: C − M ? 2M ⇒ C ? 3M
 Not enough info  
 ⇒ insufficient.

(1) + (2): x = C/3 and x = M ⇒ C/3 = M ⇒ C = 3M.
After transfer:
Cedar = C − x = 3M − M = 2M
Maple = M + x = M + M = 2M
They are equal ⇒ Cedar does not have more.
 Answer: C

thisisakr · Answer

Let C = parcels on Cedar before transfer, M = parcels on Maple before transfer, and x = number of parcels moved from Cedar to Maple.
After the transfer, Cedar has C − x and Maple has M + x. The question asks: is C − x > M + x?

Statement 1 alone is insufficient 
Cedar has 331⁄3% fewer parcels after the transfer, meaning it lost one-third of its original amount. So x = C/3, and Cedar ends up with 2C/3. But we know nothing about M, so we can't compare the two vans. For example, if C = 90 and M = 10, Cedar ends up with 60 and Maple with 40, so Cedar still has more. But if C = 90 and M = 100, Cedar ends up with 60 and Maple with 130, so Maple has more. No unique answer.

Statement 2 alone is insufficient 
Maple has 100% more parcels after the transfer, meaning it doubled. So x = M, and Maple ends up with 2M. But we know nothing about C. If C = 100 and M = 5, Cedar ends up with 95 and Maple with 10, so Cedar has more. But if C = 10 and M = 50, Cedar ends up with −40, which is impossible — so valid scenarios still vary. No unique answer on its own.

Both statements together are  sufficient 
From Statement 1: x = C/3, so Cedar ends with 2C/3.
From Statement 2: x = M, so Maple ends with 2M.
Since x is the same in both, we know C/3 = M, which means M = C/3. Now we can compare directly. Cedar ends with 2C/3 and Maple ends with 2M = 2C/3. They are exactly equal, so Cedar does NOT have more parcels than Maple. The answer to the question is a definitive "no."
The answer is  C

Adit_ · Answer

Statement 1:
Clearly INSUFFICIENT.

Statement 2:
Clearly INSUFFICIENT.

Combining the two:
After transfer:
Van Cedar = 2/3x.
Van Maple = 2y = y+1/3x => y = 1/3x.
Substituting back we see:
Van Maple = 2/3x, Van Cedar = 2/3x.
Both are EQUAL.
SUFFICIENT.

Answer:  Option C

BongBideshini · Answer

Let:
 
 Cedar =  x  
 Maple =  y  
 Transferred parcels =  m   
After transfer:
 
 Cedar =  x − m  
 Maple =  y + m   
We need to check:
Is  x − m > y + m? 
 => x > y+2m ?

Statement (1):

x − m = (2/3)x
x=3m

Check:
3m> y + 2m ?

Depends on  y 
 Not sufficient

Statement (2):

y + m = 2y
=> m = y

Check:
=> x > y+2m
=>x > 3m?
Depends on x

Not sufficient

Combine (1) and (2): 
x= 3m and y= m

Check:
x > y+2m ?
3m > 3m =>  Ans No

Both statements together are sufficient 
 Ans (C)

At a delivery depot, some parcels currently loaded onto Van Cedar are

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Data Sufficiency (DS) Questions

At a delivery depot, some parcels currently loaded onto Van Cedar are

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards