Judged by the number of injuries per licensed vehicle, minivans are the safest vehicles on the road. (Say minivans had .003 injuries per licensed minivan while SUVs had .05 injuries per licensed SUV)
However, in carefully designed crash tests, minivans show no greater ability to protect their occupants than other vehicles of similar size do.

Conclusion: the reason minivans have such a good safety record is probably not that they are inherently safer than other vehicles, but rather that they are driven primarily by low-risk drivers.

Minivans have better safety records though it doesn't seem to be inherently safer than other vehicles as per crash tests. So perhaps they have better safety records because they are driven by low risk people (say a dad of 2 will buy a minivan while a sports enthusiast will buy an SUV).

We need to strengthen this.

(A) When choosing what kind of vehicle to drive, low-risk drivers often select a kind that they know to perform particularly well in crash tests.

This says that low risk drivers will buy what performs better in crash tests. We know minivans do NOT perform better in crash tests. So low risk drivers wouldn't buy it. This doesn't help us. We need to strengthen the conclusion.

(B) Judged by the number of accidents per licensed vehicle, minivans are no safer than most other kinds of vehicles are.

If number of accidents with a minivan are higher (or same) but no of injuries is lower (as suggested by the argument), then it seems that the minivan is inherently safer. But we need to strengthen that it is not inherently safer. Not correct.

(C) Minivans tend to carry more passengers at any given time than do most other vehicles.

Still number of in juries is lower. this again means that the minivan is inherently safer. But we need to strengthen that it is not inherently safer. Not correct.

(D) In general, the larger a vehicle is, the greater its ability to protect its occupants.

We are discussing vehicles of similar size. Irrelevant.

(E) Minivans generally have worse braking and emergency handling capabilities than other vehicles of similar size.

Correct. It seems minivans are inherently inferior safety wise than others of similar size. The conclusion says that minivans are not inherently safer. It strengthens our conclusion.

Answer (E)
_________________

Any option that eliminates the weakness or alternate explanation will automatically strengthen the conclusion.
A) eliminate. It weakens the argument. Instead of giving due credit to low risk drivers, this option tells that vehicles perform particularly well in crash test. Opposite of what mentioned in question stem.
B)Correct.
C) out of scope
D) question stem informes that minivans are safest, not largest.
Even if we assume that there is a correlation between size and safety, how can we assume or say that they are the largest vehicles around.
E) This option weakens the argument.

Sent from my D6502 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Safety consultant: Judged by the number of injuries per licensed vehicle, minivans are the safest vehicles on the road. However, in carefully designed crash tests, minivans show no greater ability to protect their occupants than other vehicles of similar size do. Thus, the reason minivans have such a good safety record is probably not that they are inherently safer than other vehicles, but rather that they are driven primarily by low-risk drivers.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the safety consultant’s argument?


(A) When choosing what kind of vehicle to drive, low-risk drivers often select a kind that they know to perform particularly well in crash tests.
This choice weaknes the argument of the consultant.

(B) Judged by the number of accidents per licensed vehicle, minivans are no safer than most other kinds of vehicles are.[/color
strengthening but lowly.

[color=#ed1c24](C) Minivans tend to carry more passengers at any given time than do most other vehicles.
Passenger count is out of scope

(D) In general, the larger a vehicle is, the greater its ability to protect its occupants.
weakens the argument by the consultant because if the size is the factor for safty then minivan will be structurally safer tehn rest of the the cars.and that point is entirely opposite to the point made by consultant.

(E) Minivans generally have worse braking and emergency handling capabilities than other vehicles of similar size.
Correct answer because even that the minivans have worset brakes and emergency handling ther are low injuries per accident and therfore there could only be ne reason for that ie the low risk drivers.(Drivers who are less risk drivers and not the drivers who prefer low risk cars)

Option B compares minivans with other kind of vehicles. However the comparison should be with similar size vehicles. Hence option B is incorrect.

Option E is correct.. Very well explained by Abhishek


Sent from my MI 3W using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Conclusion is "the reason minivans have such a good safety record is probably not that they are inherently safer than other vehicles, but rather that they are driven primarily by low-risk drivers".

To strengthen this conclusion we can either prove that minivans are not safe or prove that they are really driven by low risk drivers.

Option E clearly says Minivans have some disadvantages compared to similar kind of vehicles. Hence, E.
_________________

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________