BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Ratios

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:10 pm
Thanked: 1 times

Ratios

by Rudy414 » Sat Apr 06, 2013 3:28 pm
The ratio of SUVs to passenger cars sold at a particular automobile dealership has been declining from 2003 to 2007, while total sales have remained constant. The total number of vehicles sold in 2007 was divisible by 10. In 2007, were more cars sold than SUVs?

1) If in 2007 as many SUVs had been sold as cars were sold in 2003, there would have been a 36% increase in total vehicle sales.

2) in 2003, twice as many SUVs were sold as cars.
Top
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:47 am
Location: Delhi, India
Thanked: 344 times
Followed by:86 members

by Anju@Gurome » Sat Apr 06, 2013 5:57 pm
Rudy414 wrote:The ratio of SUVs to passenger cars sold at a particular automobile dealership has been declining from 2003 to 2007, while total sales have remained constant. The total number of vehicles sold in 2007 was divisible by 10. In 2007, were more cars sold than SUVs?

1) If in 2007 as many SUVs had been sold as cars were sold in 2003, there would have been a 36% increase in total vehicle sales.
2) in 2003, twice as many SUVs were sold as cars.
Let us also assume that in 2003, number of cars sold was C3 and and number of SUVs sold was S3, and in 2007, those figures are C7 and S7, respectively.
As the total sale remained constant, (C3 + S3) = (C7 + S7)

As the ratio of SUV to car is declining but the sum is constant, S3 > S7 and C3 < C7
We need to determine whether C7 > S7 or not.

Statement 1: If S7 was equal to C3, then the sum (C7 + S7) would have been increased.
This simply means, S7 < C3
As C3 < C7, S7 < C7

Sufficient

Statement 2: S3 = 2*C3 ---> S3 > C3
But from this information we cannot determine whether C7 > S7 or not.

Not sufficient

The correct answer is A.
Anju Agarwal
Quant Expert, Gurome

Backup Methods : General guide on plugging, estimation etc.
Wavy Curve Method : Solving complex inequalities in a matter of seconds.

§ GMAT with Gurome § Admissions with Gurome § Career Advising with Gurome §
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:17 am

by megamutter » Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:29 am
Anju@Gurome wrote:
Rudy414 wrote:The ratio of SUVs to passenger cars sold at a particular automobile dealership has been declining from 2003 to 2007, while total sales have remained constant. The total number of vehicles sold in 2007 was divisible by 10. In 2007, were more cars sold than SUVs?

1) If in 2007 as many SUVs had been sold as cars were sold in 2003, there would have been a 36% increase in total vehicle sales.
2) in 2003, twice as many SUVs were sold as cars.
Let us also assume that in 2003, number of cars sold was C3 and and number of SUVs sold was S3, and in 2007, those figures are C7 and S7, respectively.
As the total sale remained constant, (C3 + S3) = (C7 + S7)

As the ratio of SUV to car is declining but the sum is constant, S3 > S7 and C3 < C7
We need to determine whether C7 > S7 or not.

Statement 1: If S7 was equal to C3, then the sum (C7 + S7) would have been increased.
This simply means, S7 < C3
As C3 < C7, S7 < C7

Sufficient

Statement 2: S3 = 2*C3 ---> S3 > C3
But from this information we cannot determine whether C7 > S7 or not.

Not sufficient

The correct answer is A.
Thx for posting, the solution is very good.
But if I try the problem, I dont have sufficiant time. Is there some advice on how to speed up the process with the inequalities?
Help would be appreciated.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1