It is currently 24 Feb 2018, 17:36

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The number of vehicles on the road

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 24 Jan 2015
Posts: 67
GMAT 1: 590 Q39 V31
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

21 Apr 2015, 23:41
3
KUDOS
19
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

59% (00:25) correct 41% (00:39) wrong based on 623 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

(A) increased by more than twice

(B) increased more than two times

(C) more than doubled

(D) was more than doubled

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Intern
Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Posts: 1
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Apr 2015, 02:30
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
This is how i arrived at option C.

The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

(A) increased by more than twice [Use of increased and more is redundant.]

(B) increased more than two times [same as option A]

(C) more than doubled [Correct and most logical answer of all]

(D) was more than doubled [incorrect]

Manager
Joined: 17 Mar 2014
Posts: 237
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V35
GPA: 3.19
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Show Tags

21 Jun 2015, 09:53
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

A. increased by more than twice
B. increased more than two times
C. more than doubled
D. was more than doubled
_________________

Press +1 Kudos if you find this Post helpful

Manager
Joined: 17 Mar 2014
Posts: 237
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V35
GPA: 3.19
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Show Tags

21 Jun 2015, 09:54
Why d is incorrect here ?
_________________

Press +1 Kudos if you find this Post helpful

Intern
Joined: 05 Apr 2015
Posts: 45

Show Tags

21 Jun 2015, 10:01
D is in passive voice! "Was more than doubled"! By whom was it more than doubled?

As a thumb Rule, prefer active to passive on GMAT(MAJORITY OF THE CASES)!
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Posts: 193

Show Tags

22 Jun 2015, 06:13
4
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

a) increased by more than twice
b) increased more than two times
c) more than doubled
d) was more than doubled

Meaning :
Number doubled/ More than doubled during certain period of time.

POE
a) increased by more than twice
Twice is adverb, Needs verb to modify. cannot be used as an object for preposition "by". (Some official question also test the same concept will edit the post if i manage to find it). Incorrect.

b) increased more than two times
Redundant - Increased more than two times - Sounds unidiomatic. Incorrect.

c) more than doubled
Correct - Subject (Number) Verb (doubled) pair is correct. "More than" is adverb. It is same as Number (fluff/Adverb) doubled during certain period.

d) was more than doubled
number was more than doubled during certain period. That is not intended meaning. we wanted to say, number doubles itself during certain period. Also, it is in passive voice.

Unnecessary use of had , That is not intended meaning. we wanted to say, number doubles itself during certain period
Intern
Joined: 13 Sep 2015
Posts: 17
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Nov 2015, 07:41
The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

(A) increased by more than twice

(B) increased more than two times

(C) more than doubled

(D) was more than doubled

whats wrong about A or even B?
Intern
Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 2
The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Nov 2015, 02:46
increase and two times are redundant..
between c, d and e - was and had are not required as we are not sure of the time period..it is possible that we are in 1992..
Senior Manager
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 352
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)

Show Tags

10 Apr 2016, 07:26
raunvivek wrote:
This is how i arrived at option C.

The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

(A) increased by more than twice [Use of increased and more is redundant.]

(B) increased more than two times [same as option A]

(C) more than doubled [Correct and most logical answer of all]

(D) was more than doubled [incorrect]

Dear experts,

Please confirm if the use of increase and more is redundant in option A & B
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3315
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

Show Tags

12 Apr 2016, 02:48
8
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
smartguy595 wrote:
raunvivek wrote:
This is how i arrived at option C.

The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

(A) increased by more than twice [Use of increased and more is redundant.]

(B) increased more than two times [same as option A]

(C) more than doubled [Correct and most logical answer of all]

(D) was more than doubled [incorrect]

Dear experts,

Please confirm if the use of increase and more is redundant in option A & B

Actually "increased" should be followed by an absolute number, not a multiplier. Therefore even if one says "increased by double", the sentence would be wrong.

However assuming that you ignore the above mistake, then "increase" and "more" are not redundant. The word "increase" refers to the number of cars and the word "more" refers to the number 2; "number of cars" and "2" are two different items.

The phrase "increase by double" and "increase by more than double" are equally wrong. The latter is not more wrong because of any additional error of redundancy.
Senior Manager
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 352
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)

Show Tags

12 Apr 2016, 05:23
sayantanc2k wrote:
smartguy595 wrote:
raunvivek wrote:
This is how i arrived at option C.

The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

(A) increased by more than twice [Use of increased and more is redundant.]

(B) increased more than two times [same as option A]

(C) more than doubled [Correct and most logical answer of all]

(D) was more than doubled [incorrect]

Dear experts,

Please confirm if the use of increase and more is redundant in option A & B

Actually "increased" should be followed by an absolute number, not a multiplier. Therefore even if one says "increased by double", the sentence would be wrong.

However assuming that you ignore the above mistake, then "increase" and "more" are not redundant. The word "increase" refers to the number of cars and the word "more" refers to the number 2; "number of cars" and "2" are two different items.

The phrase "increase by double" and "increase by more than double" are equally wrong. The latter is not more wrong because of any additional error of redundancy.

Noted with thanks
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!

Intern
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 47

Show Tags

12 Apr 2016, 05:55
1
KUDOS
We usually say
The number increased from 50 to 100
The number doubled.

A. "The number increased by more than twice" from 1980 to 1992. ( which number are we talking about ? increased by more than twice modifies " The number". In effect - sentence A reads, the number from 1980 to 1992.
B. The number increased more than twice ( the increase happened more than two times, here increased is a verb)
C. The number more than doubled
D. The number was more than doubled ( by who ?)
E. The number had more than doubled( before what ?)
Director
Joined: 24 Nov 2015
Posts: 584
Location: United States (LA)

Show Tags

03 May 2016, 11:41
use of increased in option A and B is incorrect
In option D, use of was changes the tense of the sentence to past tense and also use of passive voice which is incorrect
unnecessary use of had in option E
correct usage is ' more than doubled '
Intern
Joined: 18 Jun 2016
Posts: 9
GMAT 1: 660 Q50 V30
GPA: 3.75
WE: Marketing (Consumer Products)

Show Tags

21 Nov 2016, 08:03
I believe A is wrong because it implies that "the increase (in the number of vehicles)" more that doubled from 1980 to 1992, but not "the number of vehicles" itself.
This means that if the increase was for example 2 cars per year, then during the course of 12 years, the increase became >4 (however many the number of vehicles were originally)
There is a very subtle difference. I got this question wrong too in the first attempt :/

Verbal experts, can you please confirm my explanation?
Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3315
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

Show Tags

21 Nov 2016, 08:29
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
usaidmandvia wrote:
I believe A is wrong because it implies that "the increase (in the number of vehicles)" more that doubled from 1980 to 1992, but not "the number of vehicles" itself.
This means that if the increase was for example 2 cars per year, then during the course of 12 years, the increase became >4 (however many the number of vehicles were originally)
There is a very subtle difference. I got this question wrong too in the first attempt :/

Verbal experts, can you please confirm my explanation?

Manager
Joined: 11 Sep 2016
Posts: 54
Location: Azerbaijan
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V27
GPA: 3.11
WE: Other (Consulting)

Show Tags

22 Nov 2016, 00:50
1
KUDOS
sayantanc2k wrote:
smartguy595 wrote:
raunvivek wrote:
This is how i arrived at option C.

The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the United States increased by more than twice from 1980 to 1992.

(A) increased by more than twice [Use of increased and more is redundant.]

(B) increased more than two times [same as option A]

(C) more than doubled [Correct and most logical answer of all]

(D) was more than doubled [incorrect]

Dear experts,

Please confirm if the use of increase and more is redundant in option A & B

Actually "increased" should be followed by an absolute number, not a multiplier. Therefore even if one says "increased by double", the sentence would be wrong.

However assuming that you ignore the above mistake, then "increase" and "more" are not redundant. The word "increase" refers to the number of cars and the word "more" refers to the number 2; "number of cars" and "2" are two different items.

The phrase "increase by double" and "increase by more than double" are equally wrong. The latter is not more wrong because of any additional error of redundancy.

I there an article or post explaining this concept? I got little bit confused about this topic, because till today I never knew that "more than" can modify twice not "the number" as always assumed...
_________________

Press +1 Kudos if my post helped you a little and help me to ulcock the tests Wish you all success

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Posts: 300
Location: India
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Show Tags

22 Nov 2016, 11:27
1
KUDOS
Hi Verbal Expert,

Is it right to use comparative degree in this way? -- I more than doubled my work from yesterday.

I could not think of any verb which can use comparative degree before verb. Please provide some example if possible. Thanks
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Posts: 300
Location: India
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Show Tags

22 Nov 2016, 11:40
1
KUDOS
Hi Verbal Expert,

Is it right to use comparative degree in this way? -- I more than doubled my work from yesterday.

I could not think of any verb which can use comparative degree before verb. Please provide some example if possible. Thanks
Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3315
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

Show Tags

23 Nov 2016, 05:21
5
KUDOS
Expert's post
AR15J wrote:
Hi Verbal Expert,

Is it right to use comparative degree in this way? -- I more than doubled my work from yesterday.

I could not think of any verb which can use comparative degree before verb. Please provide some example if possible. Thanks

A slight correction:
I more than doubled my work from yesterday to today.

Think it this way:
Suppose I doubled my work from yesterday to today.... what if today's work is not 2 times but 2.1 times yesterday's work. Then one way of expressing would be "more than doubled".
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Posts: 300
Location: India
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Show Tags

24 Nov 2016, 08:43
2
KUDOS
sayantanc2k wrote:
AR15J wrote:
Hi Verbal Expert,

Is it right to use comparative degree in this way? -- I more than doubled my work from yesterday.

I could not think of any verb which can use comparative degree before verb. Please provide some example if possible. Thanks

A slight correction:
I more than doubled my work from yesterday to today.

Think it this way:
Suppose I doubled my work from yesterday to today.... what if today's work is not 2 times but 2.1 times yesterday's work. Then one way of expressing would be "more than doubled".

Thanks for the explanation !! That means comparative degree can be used before the verb. Correct me if I am wrong.
Re: The number of vehicles on the road   [#permalink] 24 Nov 2016, 08:43

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 29 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by