Comparison: Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 vs. Nokian WetProof

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 (62%) than Yokohama (57%). 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. When it comes to comparison, eu labels can be also interesting - 98% of Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 dimensions has A wet grip rating. Most (100%) of the Nokian WetProof also have A wet ratings.

#	Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 /0%	Nokian WetProof /68%	Add to comparison Make Model New comparison

Dimensions	R14 - R19	R14 - R20
Price	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices
Remove	Remove from comparison	Remove from comparison

Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51

/0%

Nokian WetProof

/68%

Add to comparison

Make

Model

New comparison

Dimensions

R14 - R19

R14 - R20

Price

Set dimension to see prices

Remove

Remove from comparison

Segment

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Upper-middle

2. Nokian WetProof Upper-middle

Number of sizes available

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 59

2. Nokian WetProof 47

Number of tests

1. Nokian WetProof 14x

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 2x

Best position in test

1. Nokian WetProof 1.

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 10.

Worst position in test

1. Nokian WetProof 17.

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 25.

Average position in tests

1. Nokian WetProof 5.64

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 17.5

Year of the last test

1. Nokian WetProof 2023

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 2022

Best rating in test

1. Nokian WetProof Highly recommended

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Sufficient

Worst rating in test

1. Nokian WetProof Recommended

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Sufficient

Wet

(Overall rating)

Nokian
WetProof

80%

Yokohama
BLUEARTH-GT AE51

65%

Aquaplaning - cross

1. Nokian WetProof 72%

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 50%

Wet handling

1. Nokian WetProof 86%

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 50%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

1. Nokian WetProof 81%

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 72%

Wet braking

1. Nokian WetProof 85%

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 78%

Wet circle cornering

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 100%

2. Nokian WetProof 91%

Wet braking according to EU label

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 A

2. Nokian WetProof A

Dry

(Overall rating)

Nokian
WetProof

80%

Yokohama
BLUEARTH-GT AE51

77%

Dry braking

1. Nokian WetProof 87%

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 85%

Dry handling

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 90%

2. Nokian WetProof 80%

Dry lane changing

1. Nokian WetProof 81%

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 67%

Comfort

(Overall rating)

Yokohama
BLUEARTH-GT AE51

90%

Nokian
WetProof

86%

Exterior noise

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 90%

2. Nokian WetProof 86%

Outside noise accoring to EU label

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 ?

2. Nokian WetProof ?

Costs

(Overall rating)

Nokian
WetProof

61%

Yokohama
BLUEARTH-GT AE51

60%

Rolling resistance

1. Nokian WetProof 61%

2. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 60%

Fuel consumption according to EU label

1. Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 B

2. Nokian WetProof C

Add to comparison

Mutual tests

Autozeitung Summer tyre test 2022 215/55 R17

Name	Wet	Dry
Best values in test	146	134
Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 Rating: Sufficient	91	113
Nokian Wetproof Rating: Good	124	114
Show test details

Comparison: Yokohama BLUEARTH-GT AE51 vs. Nokian WetProof

Add to comparison

Add to comparison

Dimensions and prices

Mutual tests

Summer

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Winter

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Allround

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands