On Feb 18, 10:18 pm, Lanny Chambers <la...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article <2044-47BA3917-...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> shka...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(S K) wrote:
>
> > I was never debating better milage because of a tank being near empty.
> > It is just simple math...
>
> WHOOOOSH!! (sound of joke zooming over your head)
>
> This group tends to ravage typos with ruthless glee. 390 MPG was too
> juicy to resist.
>
> Take your time, never trust a spell checker, and proofread twice before
> you click the Post button.
>
> --
> Lanny Chambers
> St. Louis, MO
> '94C
LOL>Not sure about over there in MO, but here in Calif. MPG means
Miles Per Gallon>>LOL. But that was 32 MPG, 390 total tank :-).
|
