A car owner who is too proactive about general maintenance introduces

Question

A car owner who is too proactive about general maintenance introduces risk of incurring unnecessary expense, not to mention the risk of premature part replacement, and the loss of time required to conduct such visits. On the other hand, it is understood that a car owner who waits too long for general maintenance stands to spend more money on repairs that could have been prevented if detected sooner. Accordingly, some experts advise car owners to refrain from scheduling auto mechanic appointments when the car appears free of any issue.
 
Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?
 
Ⓐ Some auto mechanics apply an optimal balance of preventative and required maintenance.
Ⓑ Many car owners can only afford visiting an auto mechanic if the condition impacts car owners’ ability to operate the vehicle.
Ⓒ Car owners who lack automotive maintenance sophistication struggle to determine the ideal time to schedule an appointment with a mechanic.
Ⓓ Larger auto maintenance chains have applied pressure on their auto mechanics to be more proactive in diagnosing conditions that could warrant repairs.
Ⓔ Many of the most costly auto maintenance problems are not obvious to an unsophisticated owner but are to a well-trained mechanic.

quietreader · Accepted Answer

Answer choice E is the best option here. If we focus strictly on the argument, it says that "Car owners should refrain from scheduling an appointment when the car appears free of any issue". For statements like this, I found it helpful to paraphrase the argument using short notation. To paraphrase into a conditional format I would write it as (if no issue -> no schedule appointment). The assumption that this argument is making is that automobile owners have the ability to detect when an issue is present. This is a big assumption that should immediately alert someone who is reading the argument.

Option A is irrelevant since our argument involves determining whether we should wait to schedule appointments until an issue is identified. The ability of mechanics is not what the argument is addressing.

Option B is irrelevant as the answer choice gives information regarding someone's ability to visit a mechanic, when the argument only makes a statement about whether someone should visit (whether someone is able to achieve this ideal is not really at issue. We care only if we learn more about whether someone should visit the mechanic provided they are able to)

Answer choice C is the second best option, although still flawed. Car owners may struggle to find the ideal time to schedule an appointment, but that doesn't really affect whether or not they should wait until there is an issue. Sure they might struggle, but so what? This doesn't weaken the argument that they "Should" wait to schedule an appointment. Just because someone struggles doesn't give us any insight into whether they "should or should not" perform the action.

Answer choice D I think missed the point of the argument. The argument is "Should we wait until there is an issue to schedule an appointment?" Whether or not larger auto chains have made their mechanics more effective is not actually relevant. For those who pick D, you might pick this option because you paraphrased the argument differently to something along the lines of "Owners are more effective at diagnosing issues than mechanics". In such a case, answer choice D could weaken by making the mechanics seem more competent, but even then it wouldn't be a strong weaken answer choice since we still don't have any knowledge regarding how effective automobile owners are.

Answer choice E directly addresses the gap in the argument regarding the ability of automobile owners to diagnose issues. By saying that owners are not able to and that mechanics are, we weaken the argument that owners should wait until they discover an issue since there could be undiscovered issues that go unchecked and cause more damage. This would strongly indicate that mechanics are more qualified to determine optimal check-up times, and would thus weaken the claim that car owners should wait to identify an issue before bringing the car in for maintenance.

I'd love to hear other people's thoughts on this question as well.

warriorguy · Answer

My 2 cents:

Ⓐ Some auto mechanics apply an optimal balance of preventative and required maintenance. -  Modifier "some". Doesn't address the issue. 
Ⓑ Many car owners can only afford visiting an auto mechanic if the condition impacts car owners’ ability to operate the vehicle. -  Strengthens experts' stand. 
Ⓒ Car owners who lack automotive maintenance sophistication struggle to determine the ideal time to schedule an appointment with a mechanic. -  Thus should visit only when you face an issue. Strengthens  
Ⓓ Larger auto maintenance chains have applied pressure on their auto mechanics to be more proactive in diagnosing conditions that could warrant repairs. -  Irrelevant  
Ⓔ Many of the most costly auto maintenance problems are not obvious to an unsophisticated owner but are to a well-trained mechanic. -  Correct. Experts assume that car owners have the ability to detect an issue and then go to the mechanic. e.g. car breakdown etc. But what if there are some problems which are not obvious and could lead to greater damage. These problems are expensive. Hence the claim is shattered.

arvind910619 · Answer

IMO E
I was in a split between C and E but chose E.
C is inherently as it does not say anything about about sophisticated owners .
Choice E correctly weakens the argument as it says may problems are not detected by owners but by expert mechanics.

sunny91 · Answer

Hi, I discarded option E and voted C because option E states that - Many of the most costly auto maintenance problems.....We dont know what fraction of the maintenance problems are expensive to unsophisticated owners. Please help me in understanding this.

gmatexam439 · Answer

A car owner who is too proactive about general maintenance introduces risk of incurring unnecessary expense, not to mention the risk of premature part replacement, and the loss of time required to conduct such visits. On the other hand, it is understood that a car owner who waits too long for general maintenance stands to spend more money on repairs that could have been prevented if detected sooner. Accordingly, some experts advise car owners to refrain from scheduling auto mechanic appointments when the car appears free of any issue.
 
Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?
 
Ⓐ Some auto mechanics apply an optimal balance of preventative and required maintenance. - Okay? Out of scope. 
Ⓑ Many car owners can only afford visiting an auto mechanic if the condition impacts car owners’ ability to operate the vehicle. - This strengthens the argument. 
Ⓒ Car owners who lack automotive maintenance sophistication struggle to determine the ideal time to schedule an appointment with a mechanic. - A person might know the issue but might not be able to make an appointment. 
Ⓓ Larger auto maintenance chains have applied pressure on their auto mechanics to be more proactive in diagnosing conditions that could warrant repairs. - This strengthens the argument, since people will get their cars repaired only when they see any issue, so the mechanics should be able to point out the issues. 
Ⓔ Many of the most costly auto maintenance problems are not obvious to an unsophisticated owner but are to a well-trained mechanic. - Correct. If the person doesn't come to know the issue, then he/she will end up not visiting the mechanic.

spetznaz · Answer

+1 for option E. We need to weaken the argument. In the pre-think process ask yourself - Just because car appears to be free of all problems does it mean that it indeed does not require maintenance ? Only option E fits the bill.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

A car owner who is too proactive about general maintenance introduces

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A car owner who is too proactive about general maintenance introduces

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards