Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 18:20 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 18:20

Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Manager
Manager
Joined: 24 Jan 2015
Posts: 56
Own Kudos [?]: 602 [113]
Given Kudos: 9
GPA: 4
WE:Consulting (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
CR Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2413
Own Kudos [?]: 15266 [27]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Send PM
User avatar
Queens MBA Thread Master
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Posts: 141
Own Kudos [?]: 379 [14]
Given Kudos: 45
Concentration: Leadership, General Management
Send PM
General Discussion
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [3]
Given Kudos: 16
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
2
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
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]
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 05 Apr 2015
Posts: 28
Own Kudos [?]: 31 [1]
Given Kudos: 35
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
1
Kudos
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)!
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Status:Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Posts: 223
Own Kudos [?]: 546 [0]
Given Kudos: 471
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE:Information Technology (Consulting)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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]

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


Dear experts,

Please confirm if the use of increase and more is redundant in option A & B
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 30
Own Kudos [?]: 46 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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 ?)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Nov 2015
Posts: 408
Own Kudos [?]: 125 [0]
Given Kudos: 231
Location: United States (LA)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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
Current Student
Joined: 18 Jun 2016
Posts: 82
Own Kudos [?]: 68 [0]
Given Kudos: 3
GRE 1: Q169 V157
GPA: 3.75
WE:Consulting (Non-Profit and Government)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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?
CR Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2413
Own Kudos [?]: 15266 [1]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
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?


Yes, your understanding is correct.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2016
Posts: 39
Own Kudos [?]: 41 [1]
Given Kudos: 126
Location: Ukraine
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V27
GPA: 3.11
WE:Accounting (Accounting)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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]

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


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...
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Posts: 222
Own Kudos [?]: 153 [0]
Given Kudos: 145
Location: India
GPA: 3.9
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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
CR Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2413
Own Kudos [?]: 15266 [6]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
6
Kudos
Expert Reply
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".
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2016
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: [0]
Given Kudos: 6
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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
Intern
Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2016
Posts: 39
Own Kudos [?]: 41 [0]
Given Kudos: 126
Location: Ukraine
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V27
GPA: 3.11
WE:Accounting (Accounting)
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
ceslamian wrote:
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 :wink:

Originally posted by Resad95 on 25 Nov 2016, 14:13.
Last edited by Resad95 on 25 Nov 2016, 23:23, edited 1 time in total.
SVP
SVP
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2261
Own Kudos [?]: 3671 [0]
Given Kudos: 8
Location: New York, NY
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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).
Manager
Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 164
Own Kudos [?]: 85 [1]
Given Kudos: 905
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 620 Q50 V24
GRE 1: Q167 V147
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
1
Kudos
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.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2017
Posts: 19
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [0]
Given Kudos: 182
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
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]

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


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.




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
Intern
Intern
Joined: 08 Nov 2015
Posts: 39
Own Kudos [?]: 51 [0]
Given Kudos: 29
GMAT 1: 460 Q32 V22
Send PM
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
AVRonaldo wrote:
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


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
GMAT Club Bot
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the [#permalink]
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne