GMAC paper based tests

I think the best is D.

D states that Deluxe has made fewer changes in the vehicles that it produces compared to those of other manufacturers. The premise in Q stem is that Deluxe vehicles are durable (and subsequently could require less maintenance and modifications in design as result of poor performance).

A maintains that the price of a Deluxe vehicle today is relatively same to price of a Deluxe vehicle in 1970. So what? Deluxe kept its production costs stable? Not relevant, with respect to fact that Deluxe wants to promote its vehicles' reliability, not cost effectiveness.

B states that Deluxe has produced roughly the same amount of vehicles every year since 1970. Not relevant.

C states that Deluxe car owners take good care of their vehicles. This statement would actually undercut the author's argument, i.e. Deluxe doesn't make durable cars--its owners help keep them durable.

E is akin to A. Deluxe prices have been relatively stable over the years. This does not add to the product durability argument.

Hi

What's the OA


I think that it should be B

Bhandaripreeti wrote:Hi

What's the OA


I think that it should be B

Even I think it should be B. Remember, the statement talks about all vehicles since 1970. If the company increased the production drastically in the recent years, obviously more than half of them will remain on road. If the production is almost same and still more than half the vehicles remain, this indicates something about the durability!

OA is B.....

On second thoughts --B.

Expln--Though the comapny has not increased it's production,those cars are still on road.This really acts FOR the advert.

B

half of cars since 70s are on road

so if we have more than half cars manufactured just last year than it violates the durability claims

so if distribution of cars is uniform so the cars are actually durable

HTH

Ans B and D are very close.

The advert is about durability of cars produced by tht particular company with respect to the competitors. So any answer which supports both the things(durability+comparison with competitors)

ans B looks into one aspect that is durability. It says that the sales has not increased but there is no word about the competitors.

and D justifies both the aspect durability+comparison with competitors.


guys any comments?

@prasant_naidu,

IMO--The author justifies the durability aspect he talks about in the argument by saying a third of the cars manufactured are still on the road.

Something closer to evidence (FOR the evidence) should be answer.

When the author is talking about figures,its natural for one to expect that just because the production figures have increased,we find more cars of the co.

But,again the answer choices culls that thought and stresses the durability aspect of those cars by saying --production of those cars hasn't changed much.

CMIIAW.

Opening this thread again, since this is very good example of how strengthen question can be an assumption question.

Indeed if we negate B entire premise will fall in parts.

Actually B wants to say the number of vehicles the company has produced since 1970 is constant.
More precise....it says the number has not increased over the mentioned time.

This is what we need to strengthen the conclusion.

reply2spg wrote:Opening this thread again, since this is very good example of how strengthen question can be an assumption question.

Indeed if we negate B entire premise will fall in parts.

Nice dig Sudhanshu. This is a good question.

reply2spg wrote:Opening this thread again, since this is very good example of how strengthen question can be an assumption question.

Indeed if we negate B entire premise will fall in parts.

All strengthen (or weaken) questions are in principle assumption questions.

Arun

Cybermusings wrote:detailed explanations please

this argument is tough