So, it's C because the evidence presented compares the PZ1000 to other cars in its class, but then uses that evidence to conclude that the PZ1000 is one of the safest available, comparing it to all other cars. If the class to which it belongs is more likely to be involved in accidents than other classes, its relatively low rate compare to others in its class cannot be extrapolated to the industry in general.

It's like saying rookies in the NBA are paid, at $500,000, significantly less than more experienced players, so rookie pay in the NBA is one of the lowest-paying jobs in America.

just apply a simple POE.

A) talks about cars in other classes - so out of scope of the argument.
B) It actually strengthens the argument.
D) It is just a statement without any evidence to prove anything.
E) out of scope of the argument.

Although C is not the perfect answer, please remember in gmat we need to find the best answer option. Option C seems to be the best.

so, i think it's C

sandeep_chhabra wrote:The Highway Traffic Safety Institute reports that the PZ 1000 has the fewest injuries per accident of any car in its class. This shows that the PZ 1000 is one of the safest cars available today.

Which of the following,if true,most seriously weakens the argument in the advertisement?

(A) The Highway Traffic Safety Institute report listed many cars in other classes that had more injuries per accident than did the PZ 1000

(B) In recent years many more PZ 1000's have been sold than have any other kind of car in its class

(C) Cars in the class to which the PZ 1000 belongs are more likely to be involved in accidents than are other types of cars

(D) The difference between the number of injuries per accident for the PZ 1000 and that for other cars in its class is quite pronounced

(E) The Highway Traffic Safety Institute issues reports only once a year .

I received a PM requesting that I comment.

Premise:
The Highway Traffic Safety Institute reports that the PZ 1000 has the fewest injuries per accident of any car in its class.
Conclusion:
This shows that the PZ 1000 is one of the safest cars available today.

Notice the CHANGE IN SCOPE.
The premise is about cars in the PZ 1000'S CLASS.
The conclusion is about CARS AVAILABLE TODAY.
The assumption is that cars in OTHER CLASSES are not safer than the PZ 1000.
One way to weaken the conclusion is to attack this assumption.

C: Cars in the class to which the PZ 1000 belongs are more likely to be involved in accidents than are other types of cars.
Implication:
Cars in other classes are SAFER than those in the PZ 1000's class, weakening the conclusion that the PZ 1000 is one of the safest cars available today.

The correct answer is C.

A: The Highway Traffic Safety Institute report listed many cars in other classes that had more injuries per accident than did the PZ 1000.
Here, the PZ 1000 is associated with fewer injuries than are cars in other classes, STRENGTHENING the conclusion that the PZ 1000 is one of the safest cars available.
Since the correct answer must weaken the conclusion, eliminate A.

B: In recently years many more PZ 1000's have been sold than have any other kind of car in its class.
This sales figure has no bearing on safety.
Eliminate B.

D: The difference between the number of injuries per accident for the PZ 1000 and that for other cars in its class is quite pronounced.
This option merely confirms the PREMISE that the PZ 1000 has the fewest injuries per accident of any car in its class.
Eliminate D.

(E) The Highway Traffic Safety Institute issues reports only once a year.
Here, it is still entirely possible that the PZ 1000 is one of the safest cars available today.
Eliminate E.