Someone posted this earlier but it deserves reposting...

But all of this pales to the change lurking beneath the surface: North American Colorados ride on a completely different frame from their global counterparts.

According to Luke, the 2015 Colorado’s fully-boxed frame is essentially a scaled-down version of that employed by the 2014 Chevrolet Silverado.

Luke says the switcheroo was dictated in part to meet side impact standards, but it does also result in a fairly stout package. Full towing and payload details have yet to be released, but GM does say gas Colorado models should be able to tow up to 6700 pounds.

015 Chevrolet Colorado Z71 -- PickupTrucks.com Video Review

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pQXqu-BRgM

I don't think it can be overstated that the US Colorado is a completely different vehicle.

The only thing this shares with the illegal/overrated and arguably dangerou global Colorado made in Brazil is the roof a maybe a half dozen bolts in the frame.

The US Colorado does have a lot of changes but less face it, its still very similiar to the World model. The frame is upgraded and the sheet metal fineshed for the U.S. but the wheelbase, size, and largly the look is similiar.

Underpinnings and frame are completely new and based off the 2014 Silverado. It doesn't share any styling with the global. Powertrains are completely different. Doors are based off Silverado. Interior is completely different. Cargo box taller and bumper based off the Silverado.

What is not different? That is the real question. The roof, about 6 frame bolts and the name.

This is primarily due to the fact that customer feedback from Americans and Canadians were negative towards the international model’s design, which closely resembles a Chevrolet Equinox crossover or perhaps a 2013 Malibu sedan and because of crash test ratings and towing in the US and Canada.

We were able to snag some interview time with GM Executive Chief Engineer for Full and Midsize Trucks, Jeff Luke, during the 2013 LA Auto Show, and we were able to get some exclusive details on the 2015 Chevrolet Colorado truck program, and what we could expect from GM’s midsize offerings going forward.

Probably the most peculiar thing at the surface in regards to the 2015 Colorado is that it doesn’t share any styling cues with the global model. This is primarily due to the fact that customer feedback from Americans and Canadians were negative towards the international model’s design, which closely resembles a Chevrolet Equinox crossover or perhaps a 2013 Malibu sedan. We can see how the international truck wouldn’t be as big of a hit as the brawnier looking 2015 Colorado, though Luke did hint to us that there will be “more synergy” with the international and North American models going forward. This could mean a consolidation of design, platforms, technology, or otherwise.

(snip)

As for the 2.8L Duramax diesel engine that will be offered by the 2016 model year. It wasn’t in the cards at first. But not long after did the team decide it was a great opportunity to introduce a diesel engine into the mid-sized truck segment, where engineers are currently busy readying the engine for North America. This means that it will see the inevitable DEF filtration system, and it still needs to pass federal inspection to be sold here, hence why the powertrain wasn’t ready out of the gate.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2013/11/expect-more-synergy-with-american-2015-chevrolet-colorado-and-global-model-going-forward/

PUTC you should add this info somewhere..

"A coil-over-type front suspension features aluminum knuckles that are low in mass and high in strength, contributing to a more responsive, immediate feel to driver inputs, as well as efficiency. Colorado also features the segment’s first application of electric power steering, which enhances efficiency by avoiding the energy used by what conventionally is an engine-driven feature."
- FINALLY COIL OVERS, something that has been needed since the 90's that has been standard on the Toyota.

POWER: "The 2.5L four is estimated at 193 horsepower (146 kW) and 184 lb-ft of torque (253 Nm), with approximately 90 percent of the peak torque available from 2,000 rpm to 6,200 rpm. The 3.6L engine is estimated at 302 horsepower (224 kW) and 270 lb-ft of torque (366 Nm)."

Transmission: "Extended cab 2WD WT models equipped with the 2.5L engine are also available with a six-speed manual transmission." - THIS NEEDS TO CHANGE and be AVAILABLE with the v6 and 4WD.

SOURCE: http://media.chevrolet.com/content/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2013/Nov/1119-colorado.html

This truck if they will just give me a manual with 4WD in a v6 would be perfect for my needs.

The BAFO's of the world ares mad because he thought the global Colorado was coming here to teach us Americans a lesson and how we should adapt to little trucks.

He has been proven wrong on both counts.

1) This isn't the global Colorado and 2) we don't do little trucks here.

This is the United States of America and history has shown us that little trucks don't sell well enough and are not wanted on a large enough scale regardless of gas prices.

Global GM thinks they're going to sell this truck to a bunch of landsapers and bicycle haulers in the US? Good luck with that.

Mr. Batey said. "This will attract those who are looking for something to haul their bicycles to the guy who is running a landscaping business." Chevrolet global chief Alan Batey via WSJ

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303985504579208680066608674

@Dave,
It is a "Little Truck" just looks slightly different.

@James,
The Chevrolet Colorado is as dangerous as the "Global Colorado" it is not a Brazilian vehicle , it was designed there.

I understand BAFO is mad about the changes, but the reality is the global styling resembled a Chevy Equinox and was seem as negative in the United States. The global frame was not up to snuff and could not pas US side impact crash tests, or stout enough for US towing standards (not the fake global overrated ones.) It was just an overall crappy design that Brazil made and. I'm glad US GM fixed it and made it better and safe for America. Will it sell in large enough amounts to be profitable? Probabl not, but at least it looks better, can tow properly and is safer for the people who will buy it.

@Dave,
What towing Standards. Do not exist in the US No Manufacturer except Toyota follows them. Chevrolet Colorado Tow better? It is only a "Lifestyle Vehicle" Like the Tacoma not built for towing.
I just wonder how safe the Chevrolet Colorado is in a crash a lot of US 1/2 tons only get a 2-4 rating?

And again, no mention of being J2807 compliant. Make the rating kinda moot.

Wow.
All of the exceptionalists have crawled out of the woodwork to roost.

The global Colorado isn't Brazilian. It was designed by Brazilian engineers and built and tested in Thailand. The looks were designed by a committee. They tried to make something appealing to everyone outside of the USA. All of the globals have similar styling cues.

GMC spend 100's of millions on that factory and billions of taxpayers dollars (Most from USA) on its development. GMC modified components to meet USA tastes and standards. They aren't going to spend billions making a separate one just for the USA.

GMC doesn't want a direct competitor to the 1500's. That is one of the reasons why it doesn't share the 4.3, it is also a reason why there isn't a reg cab.

The globals can safely tow and haul at their global ratings..............

The rest of the 1st and 2nd worlds have lawyers too.

To think outside the box means that you must first pull it off your head and look around!

GUTS!

GLORY!

THE BEST TRUCKS!

RAM!!!!

GUTS!

GLORY!

NO MIDSIZE TRUCK BECAUSE WE SUCK BAD LAST PLACE

RAM!!!!

BAFO is not neutral, but a known troll. Speaking of trolls, BAFO was sent here from Australia to disrupt the apple cart at a North American truck site, lie, spin, and troll. This is a fact and the only reason he is here.

@The Real Lou
This seems to occur when a midsize article is out on PUTC.

Then the trolling will be endless Fiat Ram $hit when full size stuff is on PUTC.

Maybe Fiat should develop a midsizer, it might stop a lot of this trashing school kid stuff.

Or the best option is for PUTC to try and develop a more credible site by changing the format with better security.

@Dave,

What should be concerning is that GM intends to deliver a variety of cab combinations and power trains so that the market can decide which ones it wants.

Add to that the radical design differences between this truck and the global design and this all adds up to a GM "Hail Mary", if you build it they will come.....

I can't help feeling that this is more about production and sales numbers to stay in front of Toyota and Ford in North America.

Ford and Ram aren't biting. People are going to look at the small truck and go why go small when you can go big?

Ford believes they will lure the same Colorado buyer with the next gen F-150 and Ram believes they will lure to the same buyers to a full-size with an ED or Ram.

The global Colorado is largely unwanted in the US and is partly why GM had to completely change the Brazilian version to a mini-Silverado.

RAISING THE BAR

THE ONLY BIG 3 TRUCK MAKER TO OFFER

EVERY SIZE TRUCK

CHEVY GM GMC

RAM AND FORD SUCK

RAM FORD THE 2 TRUCK MAKERS THAT ARE TO PU^&Y TO OFFER WANT PEOPLE WANT

i would like to let you know that if you go to gminsidenews.com you would learn that the 2.8 "duramax" is actually a VM Motori powerplant, not izuzu or gm. vm motori sells their motors to whoever buys them just like cummins (unless the complete purchase of vm motori by fiat changes that). and furthermore vm motori has worked with gm just as much as chrysler. the motor in the ram 1500 was originally made for the last gen euro spec cadillac cts. so all the brand hype crap is overrated. oh yeah, i am a big chrysler fan too, but that doesn't mean that we can't all learn about each other's favorite brand on this website without the bashing and crazy crap everyone says. if everyone only knew how much automakers partner and team up at certain times. ford/gm 6/10 speeds, cummins in a ford f-750, allison in a ford f-750, vm motori in chrysler/gm products, new venture/process gear transfer cases in chrysler/gm vehicles, chryslers with aisin transmissions, ford/toyota hybrid technology, gm/toyota pontiac vibe/corolla matrix, saturn vue with honda motor, and the list goes on. imo, chevy has done a good job with the new colorado because it looks nice and it has decent powertrain. the only small pickup in america with direct injection and a diesel. and all six speeds too. no one has even thought that chrysler could come out with a small truck as well. the delimma would be ram or jeep. why? they have already made concepts and conversions of a wrangler pickup. the next wrangler is due out as a 2016 model and will have a flexible chassis to fit an 8 speed and modern tech and sergio has said it will get more expensive (which is why the b series jeep will look like a mini wrangler. b series is smaller than c series compass/patriot.). and we all know the wrangler truck is long overdue. so the delimma is whether it would go under ram because it is a truck or under jeep cause it is a wrangler. should the wrangler become ram wrangler? should they make a ram truck based off the next wrangler and keep the wrangler jeep? the rampage and van based crap are already off the table and furthermore if they wanted a unibody truck the grand cherokee/durango chassis makes more since since it is still rwd. a fwd truck would have to be fiat strada (in size). and all ford has to do is what gm has done. so if the sales take off, ford and ram will join in. ram is getting serious lately so don't count them out.

@Josh, good point, the 2.8 "Duramax" is indeed a VM Motori engine. Though an excellent engine, the anti-Italian/Fiat GM fanboys should take notice.

@Steve - I think that GMC isn't hoping for a "Hail Mary" play to put themselves on top. They have traditionally been fixated upon being #1 in sales and they did that by badge engineering and trying to fill every possible market category. In the end they did a 1/2 assed job on everything and went bankrupt.
They have pared down badges and give the appearance of focusing more on profits. The price increase on the 1500's would bear that fact out. They stand to make over a billion dollars with that price increase. That is a departure for them since Ford has openly stated that they will play the rebate game until the next gen Ford hits the showrooms.

A three truck - 2 badge strategy may superficially look like "old GM" trying to plug every orifice to gain #1 but I think that it will pay off for them in the long run. They are pushing brand differentiation between the Sierra and Silverado. In the past the Sierra was just a grill and badge kit. That is no longer the case.

Not everyone wants or needs a 1/2 ton just like not everyone wants or needs a 3/4 ton.

The fact that GMC has decided not to make a reg cab shows that they do not want bottom dollar low margin fleet or cheapskate buyers. They want buyers who are willing to pay for a decent smaller truck but with the capacity they want. Most Tacoma's sold are crewcabs and those trucks are much more profitable than reg cabs. The ones I see tend to be SR5/TRD models which are at the high end of the price range.

The previous Colorado failed because it was a poorly executed design with a bad reputation. The Ranger saw "lip stick on a pig" engineering for over a decade. The small truck market has contracted due to many factors and a lack of R&D is one of those reasons.

GMC has clearly stated that this is a "lifestyle" truck for those that do not want a full size. The irony in that statement is that ANY pickup sold for anything other than work is a "lifestyle" purchase.
Targeting "lifestyle" buyers are where big profits are made. Pickup sales exploded once companies gave they 2 rows of seats and made them more luxurious and car like.

A magazine had said that the Ram was what large cars would be like if they hadn't gone unibody. That may be a dig at Ram by that magazine, but is does show where auto companies want to position their sales.

I do see the Colorado siphoning off sales from the Silverado. GM, without knowing it, just guaranteed that the F-150 will stay the best-selling pickup truck.

I don't see many loyal Tacoma buyers buying a Colorado - see expeditiion's comments and the TacomaWorld forums.

The best GM can hope for is that the Colorado doesn't simply syphon sales away from lower end Silverado customers and cheapskates.

Ford feared as much when it nixed the new Ranger, surely there was a way to better use these resources.

@Steve and Lou
I really think that GM with the Colorado realise that there is a larger market for this size and type of vehicle.

The US pickup manufacturers have a bit of a dilemma concerning this. Profit.

Really pickups have evolved significantly over the past decade and will continue for a while yet. Potential SUV buyers are going to pickups as well. CUV buyers are similar to traditional wagon buyers, a different type.

As the market increases proportionally for pickups, they are becoming more like cars/SUVs/CUVs from a marketing perspective, not everyone buys a large car/SUV/CUV. Cars come in all shapes and sizes.

This is the direction I see pickups heading in. The major influencing factor on affordability is CAFE regulations. As full size trucks become larger demand for them will decrease.

Midsizers are harder to develop and manufacture to meet CAFE, so diesel will become the main powerplant down the track. Not much is required to be expended to create these as they already exist.

As for V8 full size trucks, they will still be around, but V6s and diesel will be used more and more in them.

You don't need a mid-size Colocrapo, all you need is...

GUTS

GLORY

THE BEST TRUCKS ON EARTH

RAM

"Not everyone wants or needs a 1/2 ton just like not everyone wants or needs a 3/4 ton. "

Lou,

They understand that. What we also know is that you're not willing to pay enough for a little truck for them to make $$$ on it. (or at least not enough of "you"). There are enough that want, need or desire 1/2 tons and 3/4 tons.

@Steve - profits are profits. Guys cross-shopping Silverado's are going to be the looking at high end tow/haul and/or optioned Colorado's. If younger buyers are attracted to the Colorado and like it they will be more likely to buy a Silverado 1500 or HD if they need to upgrade.
If GMC makes profits selling 3 trucks behind 2 badges (6 truck lines) then more power to them. They may be able to expand the market. If anything, the Colorado will be more likely to raid mid-sized SUV sales.

Ford has publically stated that they will pare down global nameplates down to around 100 and will focus on the 20% that makes 80% of the profits. That kills the Ranger for the USA since it would hurt Ford's 20/80 F150. Ford wants the Transit Connect to fill the gap left by the Ranger but that has come to a grinding halt since they were dinged by the USA Government for "cheating" the chicken tax by turning duty free passenger vans into "truck" vans.

I suspect the "expedition" you mention is Oxi's new nom de guerre since his Tacoma viewpoints made him a laughing stock. if that is the case, I'd be highly unlikely to take anything the guy says seriously.

You can laugh all you want, but in all fairness Expedition is a mainstream Tacoma buyer.

The loyal Tacoma buyers are not too interested in what General Motors does and a little bailout money isn't going to change that. I haven't seen any Tacoma owners say "I'm trading my Tacoma for one asap."

So I had the opportunity to go to the LA auto show today. I have no interest in midsize so I didn't even bother to look at those. This was the first opportunity that I actually had to see or sit in the 2014 Silverado. Overall I have to admit that I was not as impressed as I hoped to be.

I am familiar with the current versions of both Ford and Ram, so I wanted to compare the Silverado, mainly interior, to the other trucks. I am in the market for a new HD truck, so my main goal was to see if the interior of the newly refreshed Silverado was worth waiting for when the '15 HD trucks come out.

One of the first thing I noticed is that it didn't seem to be designed for a really tall guy like me. I can fit just fine in a Ford or Ram, but I noticed getting in and out of the Silverado was a bit more of a struggle. The second thing that really disappointed me is that upon sitting in the back seat of the CC, it really seemed like the seat had a "jumper seat" feel to it. That might be fine in an EC model, but certainly not in the CC model.

The one other thing that I noticed that really irked me is that the headrests are tiny compared to any of the other trucks. Furthermore, they wouldn't go up high enough for anyone taller than 5'5" maybe. I don't know what they were thinking.

My decisions? Well, I decided to pass on the Silverado. My experience with GM is that there have been numerous times that I have considered purchasing one, only to later decide against it because of some little feature or quirk that I knew I wouldn't be able to live with. It really is mind boggling how GM had since 2007 to work on the next Silverado, only to release a truck that is mediocre.

I will admit that the overall quality of interior materials felt great. Compared to the Super Duty, it greatly surpasses it. Compared to the Ram interior, it seems like they are on par of each other. To me the Super duty seems the most roomy, however, the interior felt the cheapest, even in the higher end trims. I think I will wait for the '15 Superduty and if I like that interior, I will get it, if not I will go with a Ram. Sorry Chevy, do your homework and maybe 10 years from now when I'm looking to replace my new Ford or Ram, I will give you another look.

Congrats to Ford for well, just being the best built, best truck ever, and oh yes, the best selling one going on 40 yrs now. Boy what a run.

@Dave/Steve, US buyers prefer full-size to mid-size, and here's the thing. The new Colorado is not that small and is about 90% the size of a 2014 Silverado.

Ranger sales in 1999: 348,358, Ranger sales in 2009: 55,600.

Colorado sales in 2005: 128,359, Colorado sales in 2010: 24,642.

Small truck segment is shrinking.

@Dave
So why not cater for people who something different?

Really, what you stated is that Fiat/Ram should be dropped because they sell less than Ford/GM half ton pickups because they have a smaller market share.

Your comment doesn't add up?????

So if you want anything different in a restaurant, the cook should be able to tell you, "you can't have that" we don't sell as many of those as our biggest seller.

Maybe restaurant menu's should only offer one type of food, ie, what you want or like. Why should there be different restaurants offering food you don't like?

To think someone wants to do something different than you. They must be awful people.

Josh You are right about the different brands shearing the same parts and I think the 3.2 I5 in the T6 Ford Ranger is also a V M engine. I did read in one of the auto news sights about a year ago that G M had built a new 200 million dollar plant in Rayong Thailand to build the 2.8 so they could meet demands for the Colorado/Canyon.

@DeverMike/Paul/Tom Lemon/Greg Baird/TRX4Tom/Dave/Hemi V8/Tom Terrific/sandman 4x4/lautenslager/zveria/Bob/US Truck Driver/Glenn/Jason/Hemi Rampage/smartest truck guy/Maxx/SuperDuty37/Ken/Ron/johnny doe/jim/ALL1/Frank/Idahoe Joe/The Guy/AD/Casey/papa jim/Young Guy/BeeBe/Steve or whoever you want to call yourself.

Quit the crap, really.

It's getting long in the tooth.

You want to debate, but it has to be on your terms.

Learn to debate with good information, then we might be able to have a decent debate.

Opinions are good, but if they are only your view to support the UAW, then how good are they. Look at what you guys have done to Detroit.

Terror tactics (union tactics) don't work on me.

If PUTC wants the UAW or whatever to control this site I suppose it's their decision.

It's not kids like I've been told by PUTC.

They don't seem to care. So this will go on.

@Jake, the 3.2L I-5 is not a VM Motori engine. It was designed by Ford and built by Ford in Dagenham and used by Mazda. Some Duratorq engines were developed by PSA and some were developed by Mazda, but the 3.2 was developed by Ford.

@DeverMike/Paul/Tom Lemon/Greg Baird/TRX4Tom/Dave/Hemi V8/Tom Terrific/sandman 4x4/lautenslager/zveria/Bob/US Truck Driver/Glenn/Jason/Hemi Rampage/smartest truck guy/Maxx/SuperDuty37/Ken/Ron/johnny doe/jim/ALL1/Frank/Idahoe Joe/The Guy/AD/Casey/papa jim/Young Guy/BeeBe/Steve/Chris/The truck guy or whoever you want to call yourself.

Quit the crap, really.

It's getting long in the tooth.

You want to debate, but it has to be on your terms.

Learn to debate with good information, then we might be able to have a decent debate.

Opinions are good, but if they are only your view to support the UAW, then how good are they. Look at what you guys have done to Detroit.

Terror tactics (union tactics) don't work on me.

If PUTC wants the UAW or whatever to control this site I suppose it's their decision.

It's not kids like I've been told by PUTC.

They don't seem to care. So this will go on.

The article above is PROOF that Ford LOSES AGAIN with their outdated uninspired CRAP. Yet you FORD KOOL AID GIRLY GIRLS CONTINUE TO BUY THEM LIKE THERE IS NO OTHER. Take off the rose colored glasses and see the writing on the wall GIRLY GIRLS!!!!! LMAO

@Michigan Bob

Take a chill pill and relax would you. Think about what you're say saying, would you really want Ford girly girls driving the same truck as you if the were to stop driving Fords like you want them to????

@Big Al from Oz

Quit the crap, really. I can't believe you've posted that exact same thing so many times. Whatever you think trolls have done to you isn't as bad as you multi-posting the same thing over and over. That doesn't even get your point across. The very fact that no one responds to what you're saying further reveals your meager existence on PUTC.

Here's some dimensions for you guys to review:
The Colorado is 3" longer than a Tacoma CC longbed which people were arguing was almost as long as a full-size and seen as a negative. Now the Colorado is 3" longer.

On the Colorado shortbed crewcab it is 212.3" long. The Silverado short bed is 230.03" long.

212.3"/230.03" =92.3% the length of a Silverado. (short bed to short bed)

Colorado 6' bed Crew Cab: 224.1" long
Silvrado 5.5' bed Crew Cab: 230" long
224.1/230= 97.4% the length of a Silverado

Width: Colorado 74.3" wide, Silverado 80" wide.
74.3/80=93% of the width of a Silverado.

http://wot.motortrend.com/1311_dimensions_2015_chevrolet_colorado_vs_frontier_vs_tacoma.html

Colorado is not that small.

@Michigan Bob

How did Ford lose already? Are you referring to the 2015 Colorado? It is not even out yet and is a 2015. It will be competing against the all new 2015 F-150 which will be a tough case for the Colorado to "win" against. And for all the small size people I showed above the Colorado is not that small. Please, Bob, explain what you are talking about.

@ Steve - you are correct that many Tacoma owners will not change over. The same can be said for Ford owners never crossing over to GMC or Ram and vise versa. You will always have a group of buyers that will stay loyal. That loyalty varies from brand to brand and is also affected by reliability. It is around 50% plus or minus 10%.
Oxi is NOT your typical Tacoma owner just like MichiganBlob is not your typical Chevy owner. There are extremes in every camp.

@Steve - here is a 4 year old article on loyalty. The question was who would you turn to if your favorite brand died. In 2009 this looked like a legitimate question.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/09/poll-post-1.html#more

@Chris - you will never get a logical explanation out of BitchagainBob. He is a troll, pure and simple.
Well.......... definitely not pure but........... sure as hell "simple".

Does anyone have any sales predictions?

According to the Detroit Auto News, GM says they want to sell more than 125,000 mid size trucks a year.

Keep in mind GM sold 67,866 Colorados/Canyons combined in 2012.

Will GM increase sales 185%? Or fail to meet their goals? If they increase 185% how many would have bought a Silverado?

Post your sales predictions here.

Correction: Will GM increase mid-size truck sales 85%?

That's what they need to go over their 125,000 target that was set.

Josh- Thanks for correcting on the Ford motor but I did go back and check on the 2.8 and I was right it is being built in Rayong by G M according to green car.com

The article above is PROOF that Ford LOSES AGAIN with their outdated uninspired CRAP. Yet you FORD KOOL AID GIRLY GIRLS CONTINUE TO BUY THEM LIKE THERE IS NO OTHER. Take off the rose colored glasses and see the writing on the wall GIRLY GIRLS!!!!! LMAO
Posted by: Michigan Bob | Nov 24, 2013 10:28:19 AM

@Bob

I am willing to give you another shot. Please explain how Ford lost. What proof? Colorado is 2015 and 2015 F-150 hasn't been unveiled yet.

In all honesty it looks like GM lost again because they unveiled the truck in LA and not in Detroit because they didn't want to be overshadowed by the new F-150.

Just like last year GM was too scared to unveil the new Silvy in Detroit and had to do it early because word was the Atlas was dropping.

Do you plan on buying a truck or are you just a troll?

What I think MICHIGAN BOB means by Ford losing AGAIN is GM unveils a new Colorado and Ford had to get rid of their outdated Ranger and didn't have a replacment Ranger. GM beat Ford in the mid-size segment. I could be wrong but I think that is what MICHIGAN BOB meant by Ford losing again and outdated uninspired CRAP and I thank BOB for his inspired post.

Yeah Ford has no competing Ranger anywhere in the world. Keep hiding yourself under a rock (or your Chevy, which is like a rock).