GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 20 Mar 2019, 08:50

### 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

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

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 24 Jan 2015
Posts: 71
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2015, 00:41
5
34
00:00

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

63% (00:43) correct 37% (01:04) wrong based on 1131 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

Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2883
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2016, 03:48
10
3
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.
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Posts: 169
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jun 2015, 07:13
7
2
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
##### General Discussion
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, 03:30
1
1
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]

Intern
Joined: 05 Apr 2015
Posts: 40
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2015, 11:01
1
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)!
Intern
Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 1
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2015, 03:46
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: 282
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Apr 2016, 08:26
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!!

Intern
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 38
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2016, 06:55
1
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: 503
Location: United States (LA)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2016, 12:41
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: 7
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2016, 09:03
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?
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2883
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2016, 09:29
1
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: 50
Location: Azerbaijan
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V27
GPA: 3.11
WE: Other (Consulting)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2016, 01:50
1
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: 261
Location: India
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2016, 12:40
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
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2883
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2016, 06:21
5
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
Joined: 02 Oct 2016
Posts: 2
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2016, 11:54
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
Manager
Joined: 11 Sep 2016
Posts: 50
Location: Azerbaijan
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V27
GPA: 3.11
WE: Other (Consulting)
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 25 Nov 2016, 23:23
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

"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

_________________

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

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
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2282
Location: New York, NY
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2016, 15:33
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
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 213
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 620 Q50 V24
GRE 1: Q167 V147
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Dec 2016, 02:20
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
Joined: 02 Oct 2017
Posts: 23
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2018, 21:42
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.

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
Manager
Joined: 08 Nov 2015
Posts: 62
GMAT 1: 460 Q32 V22
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2018, 00:23
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

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
Re: The number of vehicles on the road classified as "light trucks" in the   [#permalink] 16 Jan 2018, 00:23

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 30 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by