Honda WR-V vs Perodua Ativa: What Do You Get for the Price?

The price comparison isn't really a fair one comparison given the chasm between the Ativa and the WR-V, but let's see what the car makers have against each other and help you choose between saving money or spending more for the brand cache that is Honda.

The WR-V has 4 variants while the Ativa has ostensibly 3 variants to choose from. We're ignoring the extra pricing for special metallic versions of the Ativa. Here's the retail price without insurance:

Model	Honda WR-V (Price OTR w/o insurance)	Model	Perodua Ativa (Price OTR w/o insurance)
WR-V 1.5L S	RM89,900	TURBO X	RM62,500
WR-V 1.5L E	RM95,900	TURBO H	RM67,300
WR-V 1.5L V	RM99,900	TURBO AV	RM72,600
WR-V 1.5L RS	RM107,900	TURBO AV (2-tone)	RM73,400

So the difference between the cheapest Honda WR-V and the premium Ativa is RM16,500 which is an extra RM244.55 a month on a 3.5% interest rate over 7 years. Not exactly chump change every month, though this monthly figure ignores your initial downpayment.

Both models only have one engine type and the confusing RS moniker on the premium Honda models doesn't mean another engine either. They need to figure out just what the heck RS means and streamline it or the badge won't mean squat to anyone.

Model	Honda WR-V	Perodua Ativa
Engine	1.5L	1.0L Turbo
Max Power (kW)	89 @ 6,600	72 @ 6,000
Max Torque	145 @ 4,300	140 @ 2,400 – 4,000
Transmission	CVT	7-speed D-CVT
Fuel consumption	6.0L/100km	5.29L/100km

On paper, the 1.5L engine of the Honda WR-V outputs more power than the Ativa 1.0L Turbo does and the 1.5L engine is the same one found in the Honda City and base Honda HR-V. Ativa's engine is a three-cylinder one however and users report that it is a bit louder in motion and on idle than a regular four-cylinder engine.

Real-world fuel consumption figures will differ as WapCar reported the Ativa actually achieved 7.5L/100km. We can assume the Honda WR-V's fuel consumption figures to be in the 8.0L or 9.0L/100km range instead. The WR-V is also significantly heavier than the Ativa which should affect fuel consumption when compared to the Ativa.

Sitting inside, the Honda WR-V isn't exactly roomy, but you won't feel cramped either. Even though the WR-V wins in terms of width, sitting in the back seat, the slope of the roof near the side windows is pretty sharp so there's not much head room around the corners.

The Ativa's more boxy shape helps here where head room is more uniform. Ground clearance is about the same, with the WR-V winning by a 7mm margin. Given that the Honda City is bigger in almost every way except ground clearance, we guess all SUV fans are here to see the level of ground clearance.

So, wade confidently into flood waters only up to 200mm guys. We don't know how else ground clearance is a boon for drivers.

For comparison, the Honda City gets a bigger screen and more speakers in the V and V-sensing models at 8 speakers. Not saying the WR-V is a downgrade, but... you're getting less. To note on this part of the comparison is the boot space and the entertainment system.

The WR-V doesn't have a cover for the boot so they boast a higher capacity boot while the Ativa has 2 floor levels of boot space. Make it flush with the rear seats and you only get 303L. Remove the base and you get 369L. The WR-V lacks this feature but the floor level is flush with the rear seats and is already bigger than the Ativa. Then there's the entertainment system. The Ativa does not have CarPlay nor Android Auto but a bigger screen. It's nothing to shout about as it's slow and low-res.

The WR-V's screen is similar to the ones in the rest of its family, i.e., serviceable, but it does get wired CarPlay and Android Auto. This segways nicely to the lack of USB ports on the WR-V for rear passengers. They do get a power outlet though.

Neither of the cars get rear air conditioning vents, a feature that's actually available on a Proton Saga. So, what's the point of all that ground clearance and center tunnel? We don't know. It's not for air conditioning pipes that's for sure.

Security Features Compared

	WR-V E	WR-V V	WRV-RS	Ativa X	Ativa H	Ativa AV
Airbags	4	4	6	6	6	6
Front sensors	-	-	-	-	2	2
Rerverse camera	Yes (with left lane watch)	Yes (with left lane watch)	Yes (with left lane watch)	No	Yes	Yes
Lane departure Warning	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Lane keeping system	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Adaptive cruise control	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes
Auto high beam	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No (Adaptive Driving Beam)	No (Adaptive Driving Beam)
Auto brake hold	No	No	No	No	No	No
Pre-collision braking	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes

The Perodua edges a win over the Honda WR-V here with good features being standard like 6 airbags and advanced safety features being standard across the range. The WR-V gets lane watch as standard, but we've used it, it's just okay and it really makes object look closer than they are.

Also of note, the WR-V S does not come with advanced safety features while the Ativa has advanced safety features as standard, but omits weird things like reverse camera in the cheapest option. The Ativa also distinguishes between auto high beam that controls the high beam on or off and driving beam which controls where the high beam is pointed to. You can only prevent accidental blinding of drivers ahead of you with the Ativa AV and H which has the Adaptive Driving Beam.

For the WR-V auto high beam includes adaptive driving beam headlights.

Finally, a word on the RS variant of the WR-V. It is the only variant that has a visible design difference in the front with the dimond chequered grill which it shares with its older sibling the HR-V. It is the most handsome of the lot, while the Ativa models have no significant visual differences besides the two-tone roof in the Ativa AV.