Today's technology allows manufacturers to make small cars more fuel

Thank you for your help GMATNinja

I understand from the above examples that we do not have to worry about meaning in (A) as long as we have a coherent meaning in any other option.

However, I still think there's some problem with the meaning in (C). Here's (C) substituted in the original sentence.

Today's technology allows manufacturers to make small cars that are more fuel-efficient than those at any other time in production history.

Per (C): tech allows us to make small cars that are more fuel-efficient than cars at any other time in production history. without 'their' it seems in the whole of production that mankind has done. Although it could still make sense, I find it hard that's what the author wants to convey.

There are major problems in other options and (C) is correct and makes logical sense. There is nothing special about 'meaning of (A).' It is just one of the options.

The sentence tells us that today's tech allows manufacturers to make more fuel efficient cars now than at any other time in their production history.
Even if we do not use 'their' it doesn't matter.

Todays' cars are more fuel efficient than those at any other time in production history.
It means since production started, we have never had cars as fuel efficient as we have today.

How about this:
Todays' cars are more fuel efficient than those at any other time in the history of mankind.
Is this wrong or different? They all basically give the same information.

Hi nikhilnk01,

To add to the responses you've already received, keep in mind that we should avoid taking very fine meaning calls. That is, if we're not sure about the intended meaning, we should look at other splits.

Also, in production history sounds a lot better than in their production history, but we shouldn't force ourselves to take that call either.

I think Karishma is spot-on here, but I'll go one step further: adding "their" actually makes the sentence less logical. "Their" would imply that we're talking about the production history of the same specific set of small, fuel-efficient cars. But aren't these cars new? How long could their production history possibly be?

It certainly seems like a way less impressive achievement than producing cars that are more fuel efficient than the cars from any point in production history, right?

At best, the version with "their" is more confusing. And if the presence of "their" is going to create confusion, its absence can't possibly be an error.

I hope that helps a bit!

Dear Experts,

I read all comments but I still have a question.

Today's technology allows manufacturers to make small cars more fuel-efficient now than at any time in their production history.

(A) small cars more fuel-efficient now than at any time in their

(B) small cars that are more fuel-efficient than they were at any time in their

(C) small cars that are more fuel-efficient than those at any other time in

(D) more fuel-efficient small cars than those at any other time in their

(E) more fuel-efficient small cars now than at any time in


I eliminated (A) and (E) because Today and Now is redundant
(D) changes the meaning.. It would mean manufacturers make more xxx cars than manufacturers at any other time... : make more cars not more efficient
(B) and (C)..

the question is... Can we omit a verb after those?
I understand that "James is taller than Kim is" is correct
I also understand that "James is taller than Kim" is correct as well.
But these examples, we compare James and Kim at the same time, and it is acceptable to omit the verb.

However, in this case, "those at any other time in..." is in the past, but today's technology allows ... is in the present. Is it ok in this case?

Hello Tanchat,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, such an omission is perfectly acceptable.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Don't stress out about what can and can't be omitted from a sentence. There are no rules here, and we can't be expected to read minds, so we just have to ask ourselves whether we understand what the writer is trying to convey and whether it makes sense. That's it.

For instance, if you saw, "Tim is taller than Genghis Khan," you wouldn't drive yourself nuts wondering if the writer is allowed to leave out the word "was" since Genghis Khan isn't around anymore, right? It's pretty clear that we're comparing the heights of two people, so it's okay.

Same deal in this case. We're comparing the fuel efficiency of a set of current cars to the fuel efficiency of other cars throughout history. It's clear enough and it makes sense, so we're not going to treat it as an error. No need to overcomplicate our analysis.

I hope that clears things up!

GMATNinja KarishmaB - i have read above that "They" is wrong in (b) because 'They" refers to the SAME ANTCEDENT (picks up the adjectives of the SAME antecedent as well)

This confused me about "THEY"

Would "THEY" really be wrong in a simple sentence like this :


Is "THEY" really wrong in a simple sentence like this ?

According to GMAT logic - the "They" would refer back to the SAME HYENAS (that are 6 feet fall) (that are in Africa)

Hence, even this sentence would be considered wrong on the GMAT, correct ?

Is "THEY" really wrong in a simple sentence like this ?

According to GMAT logic - the "They" would refer back to the SAME HYENAS (that are 6 feet fall) (that are in Africa), implying the HYENAS (in Africa) when transported to Asia, the same Hyena magically shrinks by 1 inch.

Hence, even this sentence would be considered wrong on the GMAT, correct ?

We'd have to judge it in the context of an official SC problem and look at the other four answer choices, jabhatta2. I can see the GMAT being okay with this, as there's an obvious comparison here between my response time now and what my response time used to be. In other words, there's an implied "I was able to respond" immediately after the word "than".

Correct, jabhatta2

Yes, we cannot use personal pronouns for comparisons because they refer to the same person/object as before. Just like 'he/she' refer to the person mentioned before, 'they/it' also refer to people/object mentioned before. For comparisons we use demonstrative pronouns 'that/those.'

Hyenas in Africa are 6 feet tall whereas those in Asia are 5 feet.

Hello jabhatta2,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, your observation is correct; remember, the pronouns “that” and "those" are used to refer to a variation of the subject, and the pronouns “it” and "they" are used to refer to the exact same subject.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

(A) small cars more fuel-efficient now than at any time in their Redundant

(B) small cars that are more fuel-efficient than they were at any time in their Pronoun ambiguity

(C) small cars that are more fuel-efficient than those at any other time in Clear and concise

(D) more fuel-efficient small cars than those at any other time in their Pronoun ambiguity

(E) more fuel-efficient small cars now than at any time in Redundant

KarishmaB ,

Option A: Why is "any other" any better than simple "any"?
“Any time in production “ is logically different from “now”. We are comparing "now"


Option C: Why "those" not ambiguous here?

"Now" is becoming a part of their production history and that is why we must say "any other."

Option (A) uses 'those' for comparison. The comparison is between 'small cars made today' and 'small cars made at any other time in the past.'
There is no ambiguity at all.

does the pronoun "their" also used to make a different copy of the noun or is it used to refer to the same noun?