Tests – · none yet Owners 47 · 75 reviews
Head-to-head
Updated
Bridgestone Ecopia EP150 vs Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 0 + 0 road tests and 75 + 63 owner reviews. How we score
BluEarth Es ES32 is ahead, 72–55
Add your size for an exact match
/R
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests – · none yet Owners 73 · 63 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
54
Dry
BluEarth Es ES32 +1771Why this score
Source Ecopia EP150 BluEarth Es ES32 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 59 (est.) ≈ 70 (est.) Reviews found online 46 73 Ecopia EP150: 60% × 58.9 (est.) + 40% × 46 = 54
BluEarth Es ES32: 60% × 70 (est.) + 40% × 72.9 = 71
No road tests of dry for Ecopia EP150. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
No road tests of dry for BluEarth Es ES32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
-
58
Wet
BluEarth Es ES32 +1775Why this score
Source Ecopia EP150 BluEarth Es ES32 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 61 (est.) ≈ 74 (est.) Reviews found online 53 76 Ecopia EP150: 60% × 60.8 (est.) + 40% × 52.6 = 58
BluEarth Es ES32: 60% × 73.7 (est.) + 40% × 76.2 = 75
No road tests of wet for Ecopia EP150. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
No road tests of wet for BluEarth Es ES32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
48
Snow
No comparison–Why this score
Source Ecopia EP150 BluEarth Es ES32 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 59 (est.) – Reviews found online 33 – Ecopia EP150: 60% × 58.6 (est.) + 40% × 32.9 = 48
No road tests of snow for Ecopia EP150. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
-
54
Comfort
BluEarth Es ES32 +2074Why this score
Source Ecopia EP150 BluEarth Es ES32 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 64 (est.) ≈ 70 (est.) Reviews found online 47 76 Ecopia EP150: 40% × 64.3 (est.) + 60% × 47 = 54
BluEarth Es ES32: 40% × 70.1 (est.) + 60% × 75.8 = 74
No road tests of comfort for Ecopia EP150. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
No road tests of comfort for BluEarth Es ES32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
-
60
Noise
No comparison–Why this score
Source Ecopia EP150 BluEarth Es ES32 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) – Reviews found online 49 – Ecopia EP150: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 49.3 = 60
No road tests of noise for Ecopia EP150. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
55
Treadwear
BluEarth Es ES32 +1267Why this score
Source Ecopia EP150 BluEarth Es ES32 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 60 (est.) ≈ 67 (est.) Reviews found online 48 67 Ecopia EP150: 60% × 59.6 (est.) + 40% × 47.5 = 55
BluEarth Es ES32: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 66.5 = 67
No road tests of treadwear for Ecopia EP150. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
No road tests of treadwear for BluEarth Es ES32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
-
50
Handling (owners)
BluEarth Es ES32 +2777Why this score
Source Ecopia EP150 BluEarth Es ES32 Reviews found online 50 77
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Ecopia EP150 | Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 55 | 72 |
| Dry | 54 | 71 |
| Wet | 58 | 75 |
| Snow | 48 | – |
| Comfort | 54 | 74 |
| Noise | 60 | – |
| Treadwear | 55 | 67 |
| Handling (owners) | 50 | 77 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score
55
/ 100
Ecopia EP150
72
/ 100
BluEarth Es ES32
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Ecopia EP150
Pros
- High level of ride comfort and low-speed smoothness
- Generally durable construction capable of handling potholes
- Satisfactory dry-road handling for casual, daily driving
Cons
- Frequently cited as dangerous or unpredictable in wet conditions
- Noticeable increase in road noise as the tire ages
- Inconsistent tread wear, with some users reporting premature failure
Tire B BluEarth Es ES32
Pros
- Exceptional ride comfort and smoothness over bumps
- Noticeably low road noise and quiet operation
- Strong value for money compared to premium brands
Cons
- Faster-than-average tread wear reported by some drivers
- Diminished wet weather grip and increased skidding risk as the tread wears down
- Not suited for high-performance driving or aggressive cornering
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Ecopia EP150 | B · Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 24 | 64 |
| Rim diameters | 13″ – 17″ | 13″ – 18″ |
| UTQG | 200 B B | — |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | — |
| Sizes in common | 23 | 23 |
Which one should you actually buy?
55
/ 100
Bridgestone Ecopia EP150
72
/ 100
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32
Winner: Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 — better handling, comfort and dry. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 scores 77 vs 50 on handling.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 scores 74 vs 54 on comfort.
Pick tire B
You want the most grip on dry roads
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 scores 71 vs 54 on dry.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32 scores 75 vs 58 on wet.
Tire A · Bridgestone Ecopia EP150
Tire B · Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Ecopia EP150 or BluEarth Es ES32?
Which is better in the wet, Ecopia EP150 or BluEarth Es ES32?
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32, 75 vs 58 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Ecopia EP150 or BluEarth Es ES32?
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32, 71 vs 54 on our dry score.
Which is more comfortable, Ecopia EP150 or BluEarth Es ES32?
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32, 74 vs 54 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Ecopia EP150 or BluEarth Es ES32?
Yokohama BluEarth Es ES32, 67 vs 55 on our treadwear score.
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.
Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology