P30 of 30
Beat 0% of the field
Arivo Carlorful AS Test Results
Tested 2024 to 2026
3 publications
Tested 4 times by independent publications, the Arivo Carlorful AS averages a finish of 23rd.
- 4Independent tests
- 0Test wins
- 0Podium finishes
- 23rdAverage finish
- 2%Field beaten on average
- 3Publications
4 tests, 2024 to 2026
- Test win
- Second
- Third
- Average 2%
The latest test
Record by discipline
Where the Arivo Carlorful AS finished in each measured discipline, across every test that measured it against at least two other tires. Field beaten is the share of the other tires it outranked in that measurement.
| Discipline | Tests | Avg finish | Field beaten | Firsts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry | ||||
| Dry Braking | 4 | P16.8 of 24 | 32% | - |
| Dry Handling | 1 | P12 of 13 | 8% | - |
| Wet | ||||
| Wet Braking | 4 | P23.5 of 24 | 1% | - |
| Wet Braking - Concrete | 1 | P16 of 16 | 0% | - |
| Wet Handling | 1 | P13 of 13 | 0% | - |
| Wet Circle | 1 | P13 of 13 | 0% | - |
| Straight Aqua | 2 | P14.5 of 14.5 | 0% | - |
| Curved Aquaplaning | 2 | P13.5 of 14.5 | 7% | - |
| Snow | ||||
| Snow Braking | 2 | P10.5 of 14.5 | 29% | - |
| Snow Traction | 2 | P11.5 of 14.5 | 22% | - |
| Snow Handling | 1 | P12 of 13 | 8% | - |
| Snow Slalom | 1 | P3 of 13 | 83% | - |
| Ice | ||||
| Ice Braking | 1 | P8 of 16 | 53% | - |
| Comfort | ||||
| Subj. Comfort | 1 | P11 of 11 | 0% | - |
| Noise | 2 | P2.5 of 14.5 | 88% | - |
| Value | ||||
| Wear | 1 | P11 of 16 | 33% | - |
| Value | 1 | P2 of 15 | 93% | - |
| Rolling Resistance | 1 | P7 of 13 | 50% | - |
| Fuel Consumption | 1 | P2 of 16 | 93% | - |
| Abrasion | 1 | P5 of 16 | 73% | - |
Head-to-head record
Overall finishing position against the tires that have most often shared a test with the Arivo Carlorful AS. Only tires tested alongside it at least three times are listed.
| Rival | Shared tests | Ahead | Behind | Level | Finished ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Nexen N Blue 4Season 2
4 shared: 0 ahead, 4 behind
|
4 | 0 | 4 | - | 0% |
 Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
4 shared: 0 ahead, 4 behind
|
4 | 0 | 4 | - | 0% |
 BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Dunlop All Season 2
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Continental AllSeasonContact 2
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 GT Radial ClimateActive
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Viking Fourtech+
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Kleber Quadraxer 3
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Goodyear Vector 4Seasons Gen 3
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
Performance Analysis
Drawn from 4 tests. Updated October 20, 2026.
Across four independent all-season tests, the Arivo Carlorful AS repeatedly finishes at or near the bottom of the field and is consistently unsafe on wet roads. It was last overall in the 2026 Auto Bild braking qualifier (30/30) and the 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test (11/11), and near-last in ADAC's 2025 all-season test (15/16). The core pattern is extremely long wet stopping distances and weak wet grip/handling: it was last for wet braking in Auto Bild's 2026 qualifier (+47.7% from best) and again near the bottom in Auto Bild's 2024 market overview (35/37, +46.5% from best), while ADAC also ranked it last for wet braking on both asphalt (16/16, +36.1%) and concrete (16/16, +37.0%) and last for straight aquaplaning (16/16, +16.4%). Testers reinforce this with strong language, calling wet braking/handling “deficient” due to “very low grip”, and describing wet handling as “unpredictable and untrustworthy”.
The main exceptions are winter traction and some ownership/environment metrics. In the Auto Bild SUV test it was relatively competitive in snow slalom (3/13, +4% from best) and broadly acceptable on snow braking/traction (10-11th of 13, within ~8-9% of best), and ADAC notes “satisfactory” winter performance with “good marks for ice braking and snow traction” (ice braking 8/16, +8.5%). It is also consistently quiet (Auto Bild SUV noise 3/13, +1%; ADAC noise 2/16, +1.1%) and, in ADAC's cost and consumption reporting, it appears economical to run (fuel consumption 2/16, +1.8%; value 2/15, +10.6%). However, both ADAC and Auto Bild conclude these positives cannot offset the wet-safety deficits; Auto Bild highlights it stopping around 20 meters longer than the wet-braking winner from 100 km/h in the SUV test, while ADAC downgrades the tire's overall driving safety to “deficient”.
Performance Strengths
-
Snow traction
Moderate
in 2 of 2 tests
Details
- 3rd of 13 in snow slalom (+4% from best), 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
- Snow traction 11th of 13 (+7.9% from best), 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
- Tester verdict: “winter performance is deemed satisfactory overall... good marks for ice braking and snow traction”, 2025 ADAC all-season test
its winter performance is deemed satisfactory overall, securing good marks for ice braking and snow traction
- 2025 ADAC All Season Tire Test (2025)managing acceptable snow performance
- 2025 Autobild SUV All Season Tire Test (2025)
-
Ice grip
Minor
in 1 of 2 tests
Details
- Ice braking 8th of 16 (+8.5% from best), 2025 ADAC all-season test
- Tester note: “securing good marks for ice braking and snow traction”, 2025 ADAC all-season test
securing good marks for ice braking and snow traction
- 2025 ADAC All Season Tire Test (2025)
-
Road noise
Strong
Details
- Noise 2nd of 16 (+1.1% from best), 2025 ADAC all-season test
- Noise 3rd of 13 (+1% from best), 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
-
Value for money
Moderate
Details
- Value (cost metric) 2nd of 15 (+10.6% from best), 2025 ADAC all-season test
- Tester note: “second-cheapest tire per kilometer”, 2025 ADAC all-season test
- Tester note: “the cheapest tire”, 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
Performance Weaknesses
-
Wet braking
Strong
in 2 of 2 tests
Details
- Last (30/30) in wet braking, +47.7% from best (62.2 m), 2026 Auto Bild all-season braking test
- 16th of 16 in wet braking, +36.1% from best (42.6 m), 2025 ADAC all-season test
- 35th of 37 in wet braking, +46.5% from best (74 m), 2024 Auto Bild all-season market overview
earning a "deficient" rating for its braking distance and handling due to very low grip
- 2025 ADAC All Season Tire Test (2025)stops a dangerous 66 feet longer than the test winner from 62 mph
- 2025 Autobild SUV All Season Tire Test (2025)
-
Wet handling
Strong
in 2 of 2 tests
Details
- Last (13/13) in wet handling, +14.8% from best, 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
- Wet circle grip last (13/13), +11.1% from best, 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
- Tester verdicts: wet handling “unpredictable and untrustworthy” (Auto Bild) and “deficient... due to very low grip” (ADAC), 2025 tests
earning a "deficient" rating for its braking distance and handling due to very low grip
- 2025 ADAC All Season Tire Test (2025)wet handling is equally concerning, feeling unpredictable and untrustworthy
- 2025 Autobild SUV All Season Tire Test (2025)
-
Aquaplaning resistance
Strong
Details
- Straight aquaplaning 16th of 16 (+16.4% from best), 2025 ADAC all-season test
- Straight aquaplaning 13th of 13 (+14.8% from best) and curved aquaplaning 13th of 13 (+31.5%), 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
-
Dry handling
Moderate
in 2 of 2 tests
Details
- Dry handling 12th of 13 (+5.4% from best), 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
- Tester quote: “poor steering feedback and precision, requiring constant corrections... early oversteer during lane changes”, 2025 ADAC all-season test
providing poor steering feedback and precision, requiring constant corrections from the driver, and exhibiting early oversteer during lane changes
- 2025 ADAC All Season Tire Test (2025)Dry handling also disappoints with vague feedback and imprecise responses
- 2025 Autobild SUV All Season Tire Test (2025)
-
Rolling resistance
Minor
in 1 of 2 tests
Details
- Tester criticism: “The relatively high rolling resistance further diminishes its value proposition”, 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
- Rolling resistance 7th of 13 (+5.5% from best), 2025 Auto Bild SUV all-season test
The relatively high rolling resistance further diminishes its value proposition
- 2025 Autobild SUV All Season Tire Test (2025)
-
Steering feel
Strong
in 1 of 2 tests
Details
providing poor steering feedback and precision, requiring constant corrections from the driver
- 2025 ADAC All Season Tire Test (2025)
-
Wet grip
Strong
in 1 of 2 tests
Details
Every test, newest first 4
Strong = top two of the field in that measurement. Weak = bottom two.
2026 1 test
2025 2 tests
P11 of 11
Beat 0% of the field
2025 Autobild SUV All Season Tire Test
The Arivo Carlorful A/S represents the cheapest candidate in the test, managing acceptable snow performance but failing dramatically in critical safety areas. While the tire delivers budget-friendly pricing and performs reasonably well on snow-covered roads, these minor positives cannot overcome its serious deficiencies. The most alarming weakness appears in wet braking, where the Arivo stops a dangerous 66 feet longer than the test winner from 62 mph—that's more than four car lengths of additional stopping distance that could mean the difference between a near-miss and a serious accident. The wet handling is equally concerning, feeling unpredictable and untrustworthy when roads are damp. Dry handling also disappoints with vague feedback and imprecise responses. The relatively high rolling resistance further diminishes its value proposition. Bargain hunters who choose this tire to save money are gambling with their safety and that of others—a risk no responsible driver should take when better budget options like the Ceat and GT Radial exist.
P15 of 16
Beat 7% of the field
2025 ADAC All Season Tire Test
The Arivo Carlorful A/S receives an overall driving safety rating of "deficient." This is primarily due to significant weaknesses on wet roads, which led to a downgrade of the final score. On dry roads, its performance is merely "adequate," providing poor steering feedback and precision, requiring constant corrections from the driver, and exhibiting early oversteer during lane changes. On wet surfaces, the tire reaches its limits, earning a "deficient" rating for its braking distance and handling due to very low grip, making it difficult to control. Its winter performance is deemed satisfactory overall, securing good marks for ice braking and snow traction, but only satisfactory or adequate ratings for snow braking and handling. In contrast, the Chinese-made tire achieves a good environmental result, with positive scores for projected mileage, wear, and low fuel consumption. However, its sustainability is rated as just "adequate" because the manufacturer failed to provide requested ISO certifications or other sustainability credentials.
2024 1 test
P36 of 37
Beat 3% of the field
Back to the Arivo Carlorful AS overview
Owner reviews, sizes and EU label data, comparisons and the Tire Reviews score. All Arivo tires