The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the

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.

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
e) had 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.

e) had more than doubled
Unnecessary use of had , That is not intended meaning. we wanted to say, number doubles itself during certain period

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]

(E) had more than doubled [use of had is not required]

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)!

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..
Hence C is the answer

Dear experts,

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

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 ?)

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 '
correct answer - C

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?

Yes, your understanding is correct.

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...

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".

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

"Increased by more than twice" is considered redundant in GMAT , instead you can say "more than doubled" which is more precise and less wordy.

Because of this we drop answer choices A & B. Also we drop E because no need for "had" because there is no sequence of actions in the past.

Finally between C & B , we drop B because it uses passive voice, meaning number by doubled by itself. (Also GMAT doesn't like passive voice)

Answer is C here, "more than doubled"

Press +1 if this helped

Agree - except probably a typo - you drop B, instead of drop C.

If you really wanted to have an answer that begins with "increased by x..." -- a better choice would be to change it to "increased by more than two-fold" instead of "increased by more than twice" --- but of course simplest is always best if another simpler option exists (c).

Here is another good explanation.
source https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... t7028.html

In the original sentence, "increased by more than twice" is unidiomatic; when numbers increase, they "increase by more than a factor of two." Also, "twice" is an adverb; only nouns can follow the preposition "by."

Answer choice (B) introduces an issue in meaning. When the number of degrees "increased more than two times," that means over the period of 1978 to 1985, it has gone up at least twice: maybe in 1980 and then in 1981. The other times, it has stayed steady or gone down.

In answer choice (D), "was more than" demonstrates a comparison: "The number of pennies was more than the number of nickels." It doesn't make sense for us to say "the number ... was more than doubled": we cannot compare "number" with "doubled" since doubled is not a noun.

The past perfect tense "had more than doubled" in (E) is not justified. The past perfect is used when there is a comparison between one past action with another past action (or past time marker). In this sentence, we're not comparing "the number ... had ... doubled" with any other time reference.

(C) is correct because "doubled" is used correctly in the simple past.

Hope that helps.

sayantanc2k Why 'had'must not be used. One explanation I read somewhere cites that it is because only 1 verb is here. Can you please tell more on the same. *Clueless*

Thanks!

ucb2k7

The correct answer here is C. Lets understand the question. The question presents a statement, which is a fact. The fact as mentioned in question stem. Lets come to evaluation of choice.

(A) increased by more than twice - increased, more represents the same thing.

(B) increased more than two times - Doesnt sound correct

(C) more than doubled - Correct

(D) was more than doubled - Unnecessary use of tense here

(E) had more than doubled - Unnecessary use of tense here