A route is considered feasible when it's AD is less than the FD of the successor; it's doesn't really matter how much is the FD of the feasible successor.
(AD) of feasible success <= FD of successor
One of those 2+2 > 5 ?, interesting and still scratching my head questions!
In an exam scenario, i'd just go with what I know, lower is better considering EIGRP metric calc, even with (B,D,R,L,M) variables, and hope to God that it's a typo?
or a trick question where, hop count has something to do with it? naaah !!!
Lets do some deducive reasoning here. You understand what is meant by feasible successor (AD < FD). This is true, yes? Now, if we assume no errors in the question, Then the answer is wrong. There is no way it can be "C", the correct answer would be "B". Only answer "B" passes the feasiblity condition (AD<FD). If on the other hand, there is an error in the question (typo regarding the FD value), then that would imply that there is also an error in the answers. Other wise both "B" and "C" would be correct. Conclusion, the question is in error and we cannot answer it correctly. Make sure you understand the logic and reasoning of the feasible successor and the feasibility condition and move on.
I Agree with brian's answer.
Just check that it is given that FD of a succesor route is 41152000.
Now all you have to do is match all option's AD ( or RD ). And the one who has this AD less then 41152000 can be considered for a feasible succesor.
So it is B.