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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Work Problem

Expert replies
by Abdulla » Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:35 pm
Machines x and y produced identical bottles at different constant rates. Machine x, operating alone for 4 hours, filled part of a production lot; then machine y, operating alone for 3 hours, filled the rest of this lot. How many hours would it have taken Machine x operating alone to fill the entire production lot?

1) Machine x produced 30 bottles per minute.
2) MAchine x produced twice as many bottles in 4 hours as Machine y produced in 3 hours.

OA is B

Can someone explain it better than the OG?
Abdulla
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by NikolayZ » Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:56 pm
Hey ! I ll try to do it.

Let's assume that the rate of X is 1/x, and the rate of y is 1/y
We know that machine X worked for 4 hours and machine Y worked for 3 hours, and they together filled the production LOT. Suppose that the hole work is "1"
So , we have (1/x)*4+(1/y)*3=1. (we need to know the ratio of x to y, or exact rates i believe to solve this)

stmt 1) tells us the rate of machine X. Not sufficient definitely. We do not know the capacity of production lot for this statement. We need to know either the ratio of x to y, or the rate of y.

stmt 2) says that 4(1/x)=2*4(1/y), so, 1/x=2/y.
We have 2 different equations now, and can find x and y, solving the system of these 2 equations. So, we can find how many hours it will take to fill the production lot.
Hope this helps.
Last edited by NikolayZ on Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion

by Testluv » Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:58 pm
Hi Abdulla,


From statement 1, we will be able to compute how many bottles X made in 4 hours but will not know how many Y made to complete the task. Hence, we will still not know the quantity of the full lot, and so will be unable to ascertain how long it would take X fill it. Insufficient.

From statement 2, we know that X did two out of three parts of the full job in 4 hours, and hence we would be able to compute how long it would take X to do the entire job (6 hours). Sufficient.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Join the discussion