Segment
1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Upper-middle2. Nokian WetProof Upper-middle
Comparison: Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 vs. Nokian WetProof
Table of contents:
In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from Japan (Yokohama) against a tyre from a manufacturer from Finland (Nokian). Generally, Nokian summer tyres are slightly better rated (66%) than Yokohama (42%). The first tyre test of Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 was done in 2022, compared to 2019 when was the Nokian WetProof first tested. Important for this comparison is also the Autozeitung 2022 215/55 R17 test, where both the BLUEARTH-GT AE51 and the WetProof were tested.
| # | Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51
| Nokian WetProof
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R19 | R14 - R20 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Nokian WetProof 5.64
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Nokian WetProof Highly recommended2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Sufficient
Worst rating in test
1. Nokian WetProof Recommended2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Sufficient
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking
Wet circle cornering
Aquaplaning - cross
Wet handling
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Dry handling
Dry lane changing
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | velmi doporučeno | 146 | 134 | ||||
| Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Rating: Sufficient | dostatečné | 91 | 113 | ||||
| Nokian Wetproof Rating: Good | dobré | 124 | 114 | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
