????“名褒實貶”這個成語已經(jīng)被用得太多了，不過它完美地詮釋了2013版雪佛蘭Malibu Eco收到的評論。（Malibu的國內(nèi)版稱作“邁瑞寶”——譯注）。

????首先要指出的是，通用汽車（General Motors）為Malibu Eco研發(fā)的輕度混合動力系統(tǒng)為它拿到了不少分數(shù)，它不僅改善了性能和油耗，價格也比較合理（底價25,995美元）。技術創(chuàng)新和改善油耗是每個汽車廠商的頭等要務，而且就連通用的競爭對手也愿意看到通用重返之前在汽車行業(yè)的地位。

????Malibu Eco之所以有今天的聲譽，還因為它身上有著濃厚的歷史積淀。研發(fā)一款出色的中型車一直是已經(jīng)退休的通用產(chǎn)品研發(fā)負責人、汽車大師鮑伯?盧茨的一大目標。全世界都在關注第八代Malibu的銷量，因為它也是通用第一次在全球銷售Malibu。

????正因為如此，分析師和記者們在評測這款Malibu Eco的時候，都采取了比較小心的態(tài)度。汽車雜志《Motor Trend》和《Road & Track》都表揚了它的設計、質(zhì)量和靜音效果?！兜滋芈勺杂蓤蟆罚―etroit Free Press）贊美道：“Malibu Eco是一款極為出色的轎車，價格也很合理。它的價值、燃油經(jīng)濟性、舒適度和價格使它成為你能買到的最好的中型車之一?！蓖ㄓ帽硎?0%的報道都是正面的。雖然大多媒體不吝惜溢美之辭，但也有好幾位知名的評測師對Malibu Eco的概念、功能和價值提出了重大質(zhì)疑。他們認為這款轎車與同級的大多數(shù)中型車相比表現(xiàn)很差——甚至還不如雪佛蘭（Chevrolet）自家的A級車科魯茲。他們還表示，通用在電動汽車戰(zhàn)略上再次走錯了路。

????關于Malibu Eco的負面情緒已經(jīng)積攢了好幾個月了。

????早在去年12月，知名汽車網(wǎng)站“汽車真相”（The Truth About Cars）就對2013款Malibu進行了評測，認為它存在一些缺陷。與老款相比，它的軸距縮短了4.5英寸，擠壓了后排乘客的空間。另外后備箱空間也變小了，操控也不盡人意。更糟糕的是，這個網(wǎng)站發(fā)現(xiàn)，通用的“eAssist”輕度混合動力系統(tǒng)增加了車子的成本、重量和復雜性，卻沒給消費者帶來多少好處。它的油耗和傳統(tǒng)的汽油動力車差不多，像福特（Ford）Fusion和豐田凱美瑞（Toyota Camry）那樣的完全混合動力轎車的價格與Malibu Eco基本處在同一水平，但油耗卻比它低得多。評測師邁克爾?卡萊什總結道：“Malibu Eco并不很節(jié)油，也不是一輛操控系的轎車?！?/p>

????這篇評測說明關于Malibu Eco的負面共識正在形成。通用想把“簡單”和“效率”區(qū)分開來，但卻哪一個都沒有做到?！度塑囍尽冯s志（Car and Driver ）在三月刊的一篇文章中把Malibu Eco和五款主流中型車做了比較，結果Malibu Eco被排在最后一位。這主要是由于它那“令人產(chǎn)生幽閉恐懼癥的駕駛艙”，還有“讓人幾乎待不住”的后排座位，以及軟綿綿的剎車感、缺乏操控反饋、懸掛不夠靈活、油耗平平等等?？雌饋硗ㄓ檬窃炝艘豢钊加徒?jīng)濟性很差的混合動車轎車來懲罰了消費者。一位老牌的汽車評測師約翰?菲利普斯寫道：“這款轎車沒有多少樂趣。它讓我們覺得，我們好像是參加一次要讓我們戒掉‘貝蒂妙廚’的朗姆蛋糕的‘批斗會’一樣難受。”

????"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."