Tests – · none yet Owners 70 · 17 reviews
Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 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 17 + 11 owner reviews. How we score
Ecopia EP300 is ahead, 69–61
Add your size for an exact match
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests – · none yet Owners 59 · 11 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
68
Dry
Ecopia EP300 +959Why this score
Source Ecopia EP300 Aspec A349 BluEarth Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 68 (est.) ≈ 62 (est.) Reviews found online 69 55 Ecopia EP300: 60% × 68 (est.) + 40% × 68.5 = 68
Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 62.4 (est.) + 40% × 54.5 = 59
No road tests of dry for Ecopia EP300. 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).
-
71
Wet
Ecopia EP300 +1259Why this score
Source Ecopia EP300 Aspec A349 BluEarth Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 70 (est.) ≈ 62 (est.) Reviews found online 71 55 Ecopia EP300: 60% × 70.4 (est.) + 40% × 70.9 = 71
Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 61.5 (est.) + 40% × 55 = 59
No road tests of wet for Ecopia EP300. 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).
-
69
Comfort
Ecopia EP300 +762Why this score
Source Ecopia EP300 Aspec A349 BluEarth Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 69 (est.) ≈ 67 (est.) Reviews found online 69 54 Ecopia EP300: 60% × 69 (est.) + 40% × 68.5 = 69
Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 54.1 = 62
No road tests of comfort for Ecopia EP300 or Aspec A349 BluEarth. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
69
Treadwear
Ecopia EP300 +267Why this score
Source Ecopia EP300 Aspec A349 BluEarth Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 67 (est.) ≈ 67 (est.) Reviews found online 71 69 Ecopia EP300: 60% × 67.3 (est.) + 40% × 71.2 = 69
Aspec A349 BluEarth: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 68.5 = 67
No road tests of treadwear for Ecopia EP300. 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).
-
69
Handling (owners)
Ecopia EP300 +861Why this score
Source Ecopia EP300 Aspec A349 BluEarth Reviews found online 69 61
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 | Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 69 | 61 |
| Dry | 68 | 59 |
| Wet | 71 | 59 |
| Comfort | 69 | 62 |
| Treadwear | 69 | 67 |
| Handling (owners) | 69 | 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.
Ecopia EP300
Aspec A349 BluEarth
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Ecopia EP300
Pros
- Exceptional tread life and durability
- High levels of ride comfort and low road noise
- Noticeable improvements in fuel economy
Cons
- Wet weather grip can diminish significantly as the tire wears
- Soft sidewalls can result in a 'floaty' or bouncy driving feel
- Not intended for performance-oriented driving or aggressive cornering
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
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 | B · Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 29 | — |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 18″ | — |
Which one should you actually buy?
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300
Yokohama Aspec A349 BluEarth
Winner: Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 — better wet, dry and handling. It leads or ties in every category we score. Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 17 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.
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 scores 71 vs 59 on wet.
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 scores 68 vs 59 on dry.
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 scores 69 vs 61 on handling.
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300 scores 69 vs 62 on comfort.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Ecopia EP300 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?
Which is better in the wet, Ecopia EP300 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300, 71 vs 59 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Ecopia EP300 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300, 68 vs 59 on our dry score.
Which is more comfortable, Ecopia EP300 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?
Bridgestone Ecopia EP300, 69 vs 62 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Ecopia EP300 or Aspec A349 BluEarth?
Neither, by our numbers: 69 vs 67 on the treadwear score, within 3 points.
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