tirewheelguide

Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 vs Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 0 + 0 road tests and 19 + 11 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: Ecopia EP200 62, Aspec A349 BluEarth 61.

Check price on Amazon · Ecopia EP200 Check price on Amazon · Aspec A349 BluEarth
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.

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 60

    Dry

    Ecopia EP200 +1
    59
    Why this score
    SourceEcopia EP200Aspec A349 BluEarth
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 63 (est.)≈ 62 (est.)
    Reviews found online5655

    Ecopia EP200: 60% × 63.2 (est.) + 40% × 56.4 = 60

    Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 62.4 (est.) + 40% × 54.5 = 59

    No road tests of dry for Ecopia EP200. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

    No road tests of dry for Aspec A349 BluEarth. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

  2. 64

    Wet

    Ecopia EP200 +5
    59
    Why this score
    SourceEcopia EP200Aspec A349 BluEarth
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 65 (est.)≈ 62 (est.)
    Reviews found online6255

    Ecopia EP200: 60% × 65.3 (est.) + 40% × 61.7 = 64

    Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 61.5 (est.) + 40% × 55 = 59

    No road tests of wet for Ecopia EP200. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

    No road tests of wet for Aspec A349 BluEarth. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

  3. 67

    Comfort

    Ecopia EP200 +5
    62
    Why this score
    SourceEcopia EP200Aspec A349 BluEarth
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 67 (est.)
    Reviews found online6454

    Ecopia EP200: 60% × 68.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.1 = 67

    Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 54.1 = 62

    No road tests of comfort for Ecopia EP200 or Aspec A349 BluEarth. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  4. 62

    Treadwear

    Aspec A349 BluEarth +5
    67
    Why this score
    SourceEcopia EP200Aspec A349 BluEarth
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 64 (est.)≈ 67 (est.)
    Reviews found online6069

    Ecopia EP200: 60% × 63.9 (est.) + 40% × 60 = 62

    Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 68.5 = 67

    No road tests of treadwear for Ecopia EP200. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

    No road tests of treadwear for Aspec A349 BluEarth. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

  5. 59

    Handling (owners)

    Aspec A349 BluEarth +2
    61
    Why this score
    SourceEcopia EP200Aspec A349 BluEarth
    Reviews found online5961
Scores at a glance
CategoryBridgestone Ecopia EP200Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth
Relative Score 62 61
Dry 60 59
Wet 64 59
Comfort 67 62
Treadwear 62 67
Handling (owners) 59 61

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
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score

Ecopia EP200

Aspec A349 BluEarth

Pros, cons & observations

Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.

Tire A Ecopia EP200

Pros

  • Noticeable improvement in fuel efficiency and lower rolling resistance
  • Quiet and comfortable ride quality
  • Good long-term durability for conservative drivers

Cons

  • Inconsistent grip levels, particularly in wet conditions
  • Poor high-speed stability and 'floating' sensation at highway speeds
  • Rapid tread wear reported by some users under moderate to heavy use
All owner themes in the Ecopia EP200 review

Tire B Aspec A349 BluEarth

Pros

  • Impressive tread life and durability for an OEM tire
  • Quiet and comfortable ride quality
  • Reliable handling and lateral grip in dry conditions

Cons

  • Poor traction and tendency to spin on wet surfaces
  • High price point compared to aftermarket competitors
  • Mediocre cornering ability and grip during aggressive maneuvers
All owner themes in the Aspec A349 BluEarth review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 B · Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth
CategorySummerSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover

Which one should you actually buy?

Bridgestone Ecopia EP200

Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth

Too close to call: Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 and Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth are within 2 points overall. Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 is stronger on wet and comfort. Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth is stronger on treadwear. Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 19 reviews), so read this result as provisional. Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 11 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire A Your priority is wet-weather safety

Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 scores 64 vs 59 on wet.

Pick tire A You want the most comfortable ride

Bridgestone Ecopia EP200 scores 67 vs 62 on comfort.

Pick tire B You want the longest tread life

Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth scores 67 vs 62 on treadwear.

Tire A · Bridgestone Ecopia EP200
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth
Check price on Amazon

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

Ecopia EP200 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?

Which is better in the wet, Ecopia EP200 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?

Bridgestone Ecopia EP200, 64 vs 59 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Ecopia EP200 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?

Neither, by our numbers: 60 vs 59 on the dry score, within 3 points.

Which is more comfortable, Ecopia EP200 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?

Bridgestone Ecopia EP200, 67 vs 62 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Ecopia EP200 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?

Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth, 67 vs 62 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