Closed environments in a car lead to high concentrations

It looks like A. other choices are not talking about the issue at hand.


Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum

I think it should be A because argument already specifies that its better moisture resistant than leather with other specifications such as it is a luxurious n expensive car . So we need to look for an option which doesn't alter its look and quality along with the fact that it should be moisture resistant.

A. Whether synthetic upholstery provides a luxurious rich look that is deemed acceptable to the customers of luxury cars for the money they spend on the car.
B. Whether the stain-resistance prowess of synthetic upholstery is at least as comparable to that of conventional leather upholstery to the abuse from liquid spills common in luxury cars.
C. Whether there are some customers who are not worried about humidity-related damage to upholstery.
D. Whether carbon-fiber-based synthetic upholstery withstands humidity for at least 3 times as long as leather upholstery does.
E. Whether there are other materials that can be used in creating upholstery to provide similar ergonomic experience.

Let's use POE.

A. Good enough - If using SU does not give luxurious looks, then customer will not accept as he/she is spending money for this.
B. We are concerned about damage due to humidity - Out of scope
C. We are concerned about customers who are worried
D. Too specific - We can't say exactly 3 times will be enough
E. Out of scope.

Hence (A)
_________________

OA is B.
A is wrong because it is already mentioned in the argument that carbon-fiber-based synthetic upholstery that provides similar ergonomic experience as the current leather upholstery.

Posted from my mobile device

How is answer B correct? how does spiiling part links to complaints, which is the conclusion of the argument.

A cannot be the answer as A talks about "rich look" where as conclusion talks about customer complaints. No where it is mentioned in argument that synthetic upholstery will not have rich look. We want to know about complaints that will be generated if the product gets damaged because of humidity and hence needs change and thus additional cost.

The main point of the argument is indeed rich look and maintenance cost of the rich look. Indeed it is not mentioned that synthetic upholstery will not have rich look BUT can we assume it will have the same rich look. This is why it is important to evaluate it. If yes, then it can be used. If no, it cannot be.

My personal opinion is that A is provided as the best wrong answer so that people can pick it, this is what makes the question difficult but still the provided answer choice B does not look 100% airtight. Does not sound like an official question, I could be wrong.

Can someone please post the source and OE of this question.

as per my understanding, A is totally wrong as it misses the point of the argument... as far as option B goes, how do we know that *liquid spills* are in some or the other way related to *humidity in cars due to closed environment*... ??

also why is d incorrect ?????

egmat daagh

GMATNinja -- You sleeping or what? what is the point of having you as an expert on this insanely amazing gmat forum ??

B. Customers wont be spending more money if there is no damage.

IMO B is a clear winner when compared to A. The clue lies in the question statement.

"In deciding whether switching to carbon-fiber-based synthetic upholstery would reduce the number of customer complaints significantly, it would be most helpful to determine which of the following?"

The concern is reduction in complaints. Clearly we are talking about the post car purchase phase. The luxurious nature of upholstery is relevant only in the pre car purchase phase when choosing from multiple options and is irrelevant once the purchase has been made.

Here's my understanding of the passage:
Prethinking: humidity leads to damaged leather(L), so switch to Carbon-based upholstery(C) - similar erg. experience, resistant to humidity ---> Switching from L to C will reduce complaints.

A. Whether synthetic upholstery provides a luxurious rich look that is deemed acceptable to the customers of luxury cars for the money they spend on the car.
Its already mentioned that it provides a similar ergonomic experience. Plus its irrelevant to conclusion that complaints will reduce.
B. Whether the stain-resistance prowess of synthetic upholstery is at least as comparable to that of conventional leather upholstery to the abuse from liquid spills common in luxury cars.
No - Therefore complaints will not reduce upon switching and conclusion is weakened. Yes - further strengthens belief that complaints will reduce
C. Whether there are some customers who are not worried about humidity-related damage to upholstery.
Irrelevant to conclusion in question.
D. Whether carbon-fiber-based synthetic upholstery withstands humidity for at least 3 times as long as leather upholstery does.
This may prolong the complaints being reported, ie the ones using synthetic upholstery may still report the problem but later than leather but no proof that it will reduce the complaints. Also, even for Leather - note the word eventually - which means even leather based upholstery problems are not reported immediately.
E. Whether there are other materials that can be used in creating upholstery to provide similar ergonomic experience.
Irrelevant. Comparison is only between C & L here.

if it providea less luxurious rich look , customers won't even buy it , they won't buy it and then complain , b is the winner

aditliverpoolfc, if you have a specific question for me, feel free to let me know -- and I'll just say that you'll catch a lot more flies with honey than with vinegar on this forum.

In general, non-official verbal questions aren't worth much of anybody's time. The GMAT spends more than $3000 developing each individual question, and even the best test-prep companies can't compete. In the case of this particular question, I have no idea where it came from. So unless somebody can verify the source, I wouldn't recommend wasting too much energy on it.

I hope this helps!
_________________

shruthiarvindh GYANENDRA88
mike2100 pn091

It provides similar experience, but it is not mentioned that it is acceptable to customers(irrespective of what experience it provide) for that cost.

And about option B, it is mentioned in the statement that it is more resistant to damage, which simply means that it will reduce the no. of cases with damage issue.. and therefore costumers' complaints( as long as this synthetic is acceptable to them in place on conventional).. so what will we determine in this?? nothing??

understand, objective is to reduce the no. of complains

Option A is correct and B is wrong, no doubt about it.

aditliverpoolfc

option D is wrong, because no matter if it is 1% more efficient , 3 times more efficient, or even 100 times more efficient, if it is more efficient (and that it is, as mentioned in statement), it will reduce the issue, and thus no. of complaints. So the point remains, if it is acceptable is a replacement or not? Because, if it is not acceptable, then no. of complaints in increase(not because of damage, which is already reduced, but because of acceptability).
NOTE: We do not have a any cutoff value for how significant must be the reduction in no. of complaints. Therefore, we can only think of reduction in no. of complaints.
Don't forget to give Kudos if my answer was helpful.
To understand more about Option A and Option B, refer to my previous comment.
btw option A is Correct

Ergonomics and "luxurious look and feel" are two VERY different things, my friend.

I see the answers on this thread and none of them is completely sensical. Being an Automotive Engineer myself, let me put out my 2 cents here:

NOTE: ERGONOMICS means designing and developing a vehicle so that the driver (and the other passengers) are comfortable and well-positioned, and it also aims to reduce driver fatigue and the development of musculoskeletal disorders. "LUXURIOUS RICH LOOK AND FEEL" is a completely different thing and has NOTHING to do with Vehicle Ergonomics.

Now, coming down to the difference between options (A) and (B), read this VERY CAREFULLY Luxuar, one such manufacturer of luxury cars, plans to use carbon-fiber-based synthetic upholstery that provides similar ergonomic experience as the current leather upholstery and that is significantly more resistant to humidity damage.

It's nowhere written that Luxor will replace the existing upholstery, RATHER it says that it "plans to use", which means it will introduce the synthetic upholstery in the upcoming cars. Now, if I'm a rich person - when I got to buy a car and think that the synthetic upholstery looks cheap and makes the car not worth the price, I might just refuse to buy it outright.

Complains, GENERALLY, come after I've already bought a product and am using it, in which case, reading (B) very carefully - we see that when the customers find out that the synthetic upholstery is not stain-resistant (after there's a spill (given that spills are common in luxury cars)), that is when they WILL COMPLAIN. And the whole objective here is to reduce the complaints - so IF (1) synthetic upholstery that provides similar ergonomic experience as the current leather upholstery - there will be no ergonomics related complain, (2) more resistant to humidity damage - no complaints about any damage to the upholstery and (3) if it's ATLEAST as stain-resistant as the current leather upholstery - at least no increase in complaints, and with all these 3 cases, net-net, we're able to achieve a reduction in complaints, AND HENCE, (B) IS THE CORRECT ANSWER CHOICE.

I rest my case.

LOGIC TRIUMPHS EVERYTHING ELSE IN GMAT VERBAL.

Feel free to PM me if in case you still have any doubts, and PLEASE HIT KUDOS IF YOU LIKE MY SOLUTION

it took me a lot of time but understood well and eventually got correct. Only B talks about the durability that synthetic fiber is as good as leather. Hence, B is the winner.

very interesting passage though

logic chain: A is not good in an aspect, so using B to substitute A. although B solved that problem, we should think about whether B has other kinds of damage or weakness.