2012年上半年最不受欢迎汽车

    “名褒实贬”这个成语已经被用得太多了，不过它完美地诠释了2013版雪佛兰Malibu Eco收到的评论。（Malibu的国内版称作“迈瑞宝”——译注）。

    首先要指出的是，通用汽车（General Motors）为Malibu Eco研发的轻度混合动力系统为它拿到了不少分数，它不仅改善了性能和油耗，价格也比较合理（底价25,995美元）。技术创新和改善油耗是每个汽车厂商的头等要务，而且就连通用的竞争对手也愿意看到通用重返之前在汽车行业的地位。

    Malibu Eco之所以有今天的声誉，还因为它身上有着浓厚的历史积淀。研发一款出色的中型车一直是已经退休的通用产品研发负责人、汽车大师鲍伯•卢茨的一大目标。全世界都在关注第八代Malibu的销量，因为它也是通用第一次在全球销售Malibu。

    正因为如此，分析师和记者们在评测这款Malibu Eco的时候，都采取了比较小心的态度。汽车杂志《Motor Trend》和《Road & Track》都表扬了它的设计、质量和静音效果。《底特律自由报》（Detroit Free Press）赞美道：“Malibu Eco是一款极为出色的轿车，价格也很合理。它的价值、燃油经济性、舒适度和价格使它成为你能买到的最好的中型车之一。”通用表示80%的报道都是正面的。虽然大多媒体不吝惜溢美之辞，但也有好几位知名的评测师对Malibu Eco的概念、功能和价值提出了重大质疑。他们认为这款轿车与同级的大多数中型车相比表现很差——甚至还不如雪佛兰（Chevrolet）自家的A级车科鲁兹。他们还表示，通用在电动汽车战略上再次走错了路。

    关于Malibu Eco的负面情绪已经积攒了好几个月了。

    早在去年12月，知名汽车网站“汽车真相”（The Truth About Cars）就对2013款Malibu进行了评测，认为它存在一些缺陷。与老款相比，它的轴距缩短了4.5英寸，挤压了后排乘客的空间。另外后备箱空间也变小了，操控也不尽人意。更糟糕的是，这个网站发现，通用的“eAssist”轻度混合动力系统增加了车子的成本、重量和复杂性，却没给消费者带来多少好处。它的油耗和传统的汽油动力车差不多，像福特（Ford）Fusion和丰田凯美瑞（Toyota Camry）那样的完全混合动力轿车的价格与Malibu Eco基本处在同一水平，但油耗却比它低得多。评测师迈克尔•卡莱什总结道：“Malibu Eco并不很节油，也不是一辆操控系的轿车。”

    这篇评测说明关于Malibu Eco的负面共识正在形成。通用想把“简单”和“效率”区分开来，但却哪一个都没有做到。《人车志》杂志（Car and Driver ）在三月刊的一篇文章中把Malibu Eco和五款主流中型车做了比较，结果Malibu Eco被排在最后一位。这主要是由于它那“令人产生幽闭恐惧症的驾驶舱”，还有“让人几乎待不住”的后排座位，以及软绵绵的刹车感、缺乏操控反馈、悬挂不够灵活、油耗平平等等。看起来通用是造了一款燃油经济性很差的混合动车轿车来惩罚了消费者。一位老牌的汽车评测师约翰•菲利普斯写道：“这款轿车没有多少乐趣。它让我们觉得，我们好像是参加一次要让我们戒掉‘贝蒂妙厨’的朗姆蛋糕的‘批斗会’一样难受。”

    "Damning with faint praise" may be an overused expression, but it perfectly describes the critical reception that has been accorded the 2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco.

    To begin with, General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) gets heaps of points for developing a mild hybrid system for the Malibu Eco that aims to deliver improved performance and better gas mileage at a reasonable price (base: $25,995). Technological innovation and improved fuel economy are at the top of every automaker's to-do list, and even competitors would like to see GM return to its former standing in the industry.

    There's a legacy attached to the Malibu Eco as well that wins it kudos. Developing a standout midsize was a signal goal for the fondly remembered Bob Lutz, who ran product development for GM. The world is watching because this eighth-generation Malibu that is the first to be sold globally.

    With all that at stake, the analysts and journalists who evaluate and review new cars have tried to tread lightly after encountering the Eco.Motor Trend and Road & Track have praised it for its design, quality, and quiet. Hometown Detroit Free Press raved, "Malibu Eco is a terrific car at a good price ... Its value, fuel economy, comfort and performance add up to one of the best midsize sedans you can buy." GM says 80% of the coverage has been positive.

    But underneath the comforting purr of diplomatic remarks, several prominent reviewers have raised fundamental questions about the Eco's concept, function, and value. They have concluded that the car compares poorly to other midsize cars in its segment -- not to mention another, less expensive Chevrolet -- and that, once again, GM has taken a wrong turn in its electric propulsion strategy.

    The negative vibe has been building for months.

    Back in December, 2011, the popular web site The Truth About Cars took a look at the 2013 Malibu and founding it wanting. Compared with the previous model, the wheelbase had shrunk by 4.5 inches, cramping rear seat passengers; the trunk was made smaller; and the handling was sluggish. Worse, TTAC found that GM's mild hybrid drive system, called "eAssist," added cost, weight, and complexity to the car while delivering few benefits. Cheaper conventional sedans got similar gas mileage, and full hybrids like the Ford (F, Fortune 500) Fusion and Toyota (TM) Camry that cost about the same were much more gas-thrifty. Reviewer Michael Karesh's conclusion: "The Eco isn't terribly fuel efficient, and also certainly isn't a driver's car."

    The review was an early sign that a consensus was building: In trying to split the difference between simplicity and efficiency, GM had achieved neither. In its March issue, Car and Driver compared the Eco with five other mainstream sedans and rated it last because of its "claustrophobic cockpit," "barely habitable" rear seat, mushy brake feel, lack of steering feedback, inflexible suspension, and mediocre fuel economy. GM, it seemed, had built a hybrid car with inferior fuel economy that punished drivers just the same. "The car is never much fun," wrote longtime reviewer John Philips. "It made us feel as though we were attending AA meetings to cure an addiction to Betty Crocker rum cakes."