Overall, the Yokohama BluEarth AE50 is viewed as a competent daily-driving tire with many drivers praising its quietness (when new), comfort, and confident dry/wet grip, especially in higher-scoring reviews. Value for money and low rolling resistance/fuel economy are also recurring positives. However, a sizable group report disappointing tread life (sometimes wearing quickly on the front axle) and several note that noise can become very loud as the tire ages, with some also describing a vague feel/soft sidewalls that reduce steering feedback.
What owners mention most counted across 31 reviews
Reasonably good grip in both wet and dry. Have these on front and provide good feedback and response through the steering wheel. I drive a fwd heavy diesel. As others said they are quiet and roll freely. Only complaint is there is now less than 3mm after 12,000 miles of mostly lightly driven mileage and will need replacing very soon. For the cheap price they are ok as a midrange tire and would consider again if at the right price.
Just over 5000 miles, admittedly on front of a front wheel drive. Put them on January last year one failed and one warning on the MOT this February. Sedate driving, mainly my wife going to work.
Check out how the BEST all seasons tires perform against premium summer and winter tires!
Previously had Goodyear efficient grip performance from previous car, compared to the Yokohamas, the Yokohamas feel more vague on the roads, grip seems less than the goodyears as well. It also feels very light, which make the car feel twitchy. It feels that the car floats on the roads when driving. The only thing I like is that the tire structure is harder than the goodyears , which feels more robust.
However, if I get to choose again, I would go back to goodyears, they are better on grip, road feedback and comfort.
Which tires do you drive?
Researching the Yokohama BluEarth AE50? Rate the tires you actually drive - and help the next buyer choose.
When new, dry and wet grip, noise and comfort all good. The huge disappointment has been the wear - after barely 12000 miles the fronts are down to 3mm and now aquaplane alarmingly, so they'll have to be replaced a bit earlier than I normally would. Won't be buying these again.
Bought these for my Civic Type R, replacing Falken ZE912. I wanted to go back to Yokohama as I used to use the Prada spec 2, which were awesome in the dry by scary in the wet.
I've had these tires on for a week now, and they are a marked improvemt over the Falkens they replaced. The car seems to run freer and the grip gives you far more confidence. The Falkens used to be really twitchy at the rear, but the AE50 is solid. The biggest difference is when accelerating. With the Falken, the tires would always sqreech and spin a little throuogh the low gear changes. The AE50 stays planted throughout.
I have no idea on the wear as yet, the Prada 2 used to go quite quickly, but I did drive them hard. I'd be happy if I got 12k out of the front.
Overall a good tire. I would buy again, but if my budget allows I may go for a higher spec Yokohama, as I've always liked them.
Recently changed from Michelin Primacy HP to Yokohama Bluearth AE50,and very pleased.
This tire size is not very common, so my tire dealer presented this new tire from Yokohama, wich had very good price, when compared to other major brands.
So far, the car feels more responsive to my input, no issues in the wet, and no difference in tire noise.
If you are thinking about using this tire, I see it as perfectly contender, within the "usual suspects"
Good dry and wet grips. Value for money. Noise level still acceptable. Anyway, you can't have best of both worlds, good grips in exchange for noise, I think it's worth the buy. Furthermore, it is made in Japan.
Recently tested these tires back to back with other major brand tires under all conditions (wet/dry grip,braking,noise,comfort ect). Not only did the Yokohama AE50 perform better than the competition it had more tread remaining and looked visibly less used. Would recommend with confidence.
