Yokohama BluEarth 1 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Yokohama BluEarth 1 vs Vredestein Ultrac Vorti — 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 + 14 road tests and 3 + 192 owner reviews. How we score

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.

Yokohama BluEarth 1
Tire AYokohama

BluEarth 1

Summer Premium Touring tires

Tests – · none yet Owners – · 3 reviews (needs 5)

Vredestein Ultrac Vorti

Ultrac Vorti

Summer

± 5

Tests 79 · 14 tests Owners 84 · 192 reviews

Best test result: #1 of 20 in 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test (dry handling)

Category by category

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

  1. –

    Dry

    No comparison
    86
    Why this score
    SourceBluEarth 1Ultrac Vorti
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 13 tests–83
    Reviews found online–90

    Ultrac Vorti: 60% × 83.4 + 40% × 89.7 = 86

  2. –

    Wet

    No comparison
    84
    Why this score
    SourceBluEarth 1Ultrac Vorti
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 13 tests–84
    Reviews found online–85

    Ultrac Vorti: 60% × 83.6 + 40% × 84.7 = 84

  3. –

    Comfort

    No comparison
    80
    Why this score
    SourceBluEarth 1Ultrac Vorti
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 4 tests–77
    Reviews found online–82

    Ultrac Vorti: 40% × 77.4 + 60% × 81.6 = 80

  4. –

    Noise

    No comparison
    69
    Why this score
    SourceBluEarth 1Ultrac Vorti
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 9 tests–71
    Reviews found online–≈ 67 (est.)

    Ultrac Vorti: 60% × 70.8 + 40% × 66.6 (est.) = 69

    No owner ratings of noise for Ultrac Vorti. The owner half is the owners’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.

  5. –

    Treadwear

    No comparison
    74
    Why this score
    SourceBluEarth 1Ultrac Vorti
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 3 tests–72
    Reviews found online–78

    Ultrac Vorti: 60% × 71.8 + 40% × 78.1 = 74

  6. –

    Handling (owners)

    No comparison
    88
    Why this score
    SourceBluEarth 1Ultrac Vorti
    Reviews found online–88
  7. –

    Efficiency

    No comparison
    25
    Why this score
    SourceBluEarth 1Ultrac Vorti
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 9 tests–25
Scores at a glance
Yokohama BluEarth 1 vs Vredestein Ultrac Vorti: scores by category (0–100)
CategoryYokohama BluEarth 1Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
Relative Score – 82
Dry – 86
Wet – 84
Comfort – 80
Noise – 69
Treadwear – 74
Handling (owners) – 88
Efficiency – 25

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
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Not important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score

BluEarth 1

± 5

Ultrac Vorti

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 BluEarth 1

Pros

  • Exceptional tread longevity and durability
  • Even wear patterns across the set
  • Strong wet-weather confidence when new

Cons

  • Noticeable decline in wet-weather grip as tread wears down
  • Increased road noise as the tire ages
  • Performance taper toward the end of the service life
All owner themes in the BluEarth 1 review

Tire B Ultrac Vorti

Pros

  • Outstanding dry grip and cornering stability
  • High value for money compared to top-tier premium brands
  • Excellent steering feedback and driver confidence

Cons

  • Rapid tread wear reported by some aggressive drivers or on heavy rear-wheel-drive/high-power vehicles
  • Wet weather traction and aquaplaning resistance considered inferior to top competitors like Michelin or Continental by a minority of users
  • Stiff sidewalls on low-profile sizes can negatively impact comfort or lead to cupping
All owner themes in the Ultrac Vorti review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Yokohama BluEarth 1 B · Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
CategorySummer Premium Touring tiresSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available—42
Rim diameters—18″ – 24″

Which one should you actually buy?

Yokohama BluEarth 1

Vredestein Ultrac Vorti

Only Vredestein Ultrac Vorti has enough test and review data for a Relative Score, so there is no head-to-head winner yet.

Tire A · Yokohama BluEarth 1
Tire B · Vredestein Ultrac Vorti

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

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