Hidden Car Door Handles Are Officially Being Banned In China
16 181sinij writes:
Automakers have increasingly implemented door handles that retract into the bodywork for aerodynamic reasons, but they are now off limits in China.
My issue is with electronic-only door latch mechanism. It should be possible to open the door from both inside and outside the car in case of complete power loss.
16 comments
Re: modern cars are less safe (Score: 5, Insightful)
by OrangeTide ( 124937 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @03:48AM (#65965978)
Better structural design, seatbelts, airbags, and collision avoidance systems make cars safer overall. But those stupid door handles need to go, we don't have to take the bad with the good.
Re: modern cars are less safe (Score: 5, Insightful)
by Z00L00K ( 682162 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @05:03AM (#65966058)
Add to that the stupid nagging systems that are just annoying, beeping and throwing up a text about something it thinks is wrong.
An annoyed driver is not a good driver.
Re: modern cars are less safe (Score: 5, Informative)
by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @11:57AM (#65966732)
This. Ours has lane following, among other features. Get near the line at the edge of the road, and it steers towards the middle of the road. Only, we live in the mountains, with roads too narrow to have a center line.
If you meet oncoming traffic, there is room to pass, if both cars are very near the edge. The lane following sees you getting close to the edge, and steers left, like it wants to crash into the oncoming car.
Turn it off? Sure, you can, but it resets every time you start the car. Sometimes you forget. Great safety feature :-/
Re: modern cars are less safe (Score: 5, Informative)
by flink ( 18449 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @10:21AM (#65966530)
You might not like the risk of not being able to open your car if the battery is flat but since I see these mostly on EVs, if your battery is dead you have bigger problems. Other than that's what's bad about them?
If your car crashes and catches on fire and you lose 12V power, your "bigger problems" include dying horribly in a lithium fire. Also, your "bigger problems" could include getting inside the car to pop the hood so you can change the dead battery. I'd rather not have to jimmy the lock or smash the window to do that.
They also suck in places with cold weather. Water gets behind them and they freeze, getting stuck. If you don't lock your car when brushing snow off off the roof, then you gotta try to pick compacted snow out from behind them. They are just a needless frivolity to save like .02% on aero efficiency.
Fortunately while my car has the idiotic things, they still mechanically operate the door latch when you pull on them, both inside and out, so I don't have to worry about getting trapped inside. There's also a mechanical lock hidden behind the handle, so if the battery is dead I can still unlock the car.
Re:what will Tesla do now with their design? (Score: 5, Insightful)
by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @04:26AM (#65966012)
Tesla's door external handles should be fine physically as they don't extend or retract per se, they're on a lever flush with the door. BUT the actual unlatching is electronic - you can pull the lever but if there is no power then nothing will happen. The only way to get in the car if this was the case is to smash the window and reach inside for the mechanical release.
So that's a big safety fail. On top of that, only the front passengers have an accessible mechanical release. The rear passengers technically have one but it's under a hatch, under the lining at the bottom of the door bin. i.e. rear seat passengers will panic and die in an emergency.
So I don't see the handle being a problem but the lack of mechanical release is a major one, front and especially back. And if you're in a Cyber Truck (not in China of course) with your "unbreakable" glass, then don't expect anybody to be pulling you out of the fire, or the rising water in time to save your life.
The fix to these issues is simple and the default on most cars - the handles inside and out should be mechanical. In the loss of power, somebody might have to yank the door hard since the windows are frameless and seated into the door but they should still be able to rescue occupants.
Good. And it should be a safety recall (Score: 5, Insightful)
by madbrain ( 11432 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @02:19AM (#65965876)
For those cars that have them.
Deadly (Score: 5, Insightful)
by mudimba ( 254750 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @02:31AM (#65965892)
Last summer 3 teenagers burned to death in a Cybertruck near where I live. They were just home from college, borrowing their parents' Tesla, and probably didn't know where the manual override latch was.
A lot of safety is sacrificed for very little to no upside.
Re:Deadly (Score: 5, Informative)
by Vomitgod ( 6659552 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @02:48AM (#65965922)
"In November 2024 (Thanksgiving Eve), a Tesla Cybertruck crashed at high speed into a tree and wall in Piedmont, California. It carried four college students (all teenagers/young adults around 19-20 years old). The crash caused a fire, and three of them died: Krysta Tsukahara (19), Jack Nelson (20), and the driver Soren Dixon (19). One survivor was pulled out after a good Samaritan broke a window.
The key claim in multiple wrongful death lawsuits (filed in 2025 by families of two victims) is that the Cybertruck's electronic/retractable/flush door handles contributed to the deaths. Allegations include:
The power-dependent electronic handles (and buttons) failed after the crash/power loss.
No easily accessible exterior mechanical handles existed for rescuers to open doors quickly.
Interior manual releases (cables) were hidden/obscure (e.g., under a map pocket liner), hard to find amid smoke, fire, and panic.
Victims reportedly survived the initial impact but were trapped and died from smoke inhalation and burns, not crash injuries.
These lawsuits blame Tesla's design choices for turning a survivable crash into fatalities, and the issue has drawn scrutiny (including from NHTSA investigations into Tesla door systems). Tesla hasn't been found liable yet—the cases are ongoing."
Re: Another issue (Score: 5, Insightful)
by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @05:38AM (#65966094)
This just highlights the idiocy of Tesla's design choices even more. Many ICEs catch fire yes, but their occupants can get out of the vehicle when it happens. Tesla's design makes a positive into a negative.
Re:Deadly (Score: 5, Insightful)
by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @04:29AM (#65966016)
And the sad part is all this was predictable and obvious well before anybody had to die from this negligent design.
Re:Deadly (Score: 5, Insightful)
by Arrogant-Bastard ( 141720 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @05:37AM (#65966092)
Tesla has done its very best to turn its vehicles into deathtraps -- note as well the Angela Chao incident (drove into a pond, couldn't get out of the car, rescuers struggled to break in, she died).
The problem -- as usual -- is that Elon Musk has ordered his company to satisfy his pathetic manbaby concept of what's "cool" instead of what's sound engineering and safety practice. That not only includes doors that can be immediately and obviously opened by manual action from either side, but breakable windows. (Most rescuers carry tools expressly designed to punch out windows. You want those tools to work on your vehicle first time every time.)
The Cybertruck is the automotive equivalent of the Titan submersible: if you get in one, you should fully expect to die and be pleasantly surprised if you don't.
Re:Deadly (Score: 5, Interesting)
by Arrogant-Bastard ( 141720 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @07:28AM (#65966208)
The cybertruck however isn't just dangerous to its occupants , its sharp edges are a danger to any pedestrians[....]
Indeed. And to rescuers: there's an analysis circulating in the rescue community that examines the Cybertruck from the point of view of rescuers trying to approach it and extract victims. Those sharp edges you mentioned are included in it, as are the slanted roof, the windows, the doors, the steel panels, the batteries, and more. The conclusion is that it might be the most dangerous consumer vehicle for rescuers to encounter.
Aesthetics (Score: 5, Insightful)
by dohzer ( 867770 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @02:35AM (#65965898)
for aerodynamic reasons
No one is doing it for the aerodynamics.
Now if they could only ban... (Score: 5, Insightful)
by Viol8 ( 599362 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @03:21AM (#65965944)
... touchscreen controls for common tasks such as altering the HVAC or radio/media settings and put back buttons. For some reason the authorities in most countries see m to think its dangerous using a touchscreen phone but perfectly ok to use a touchscreen car interface while doing 70mph.
Re:Now if they could only ban... (Score: 5, Insightful)
by shilly ( 142940 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @04:57AM (#65966052)
Buttons are better, but dials or levers are better yet. Hitting a stupid toggle button that’s indistinguishable from the rest of the row of toggle buttons multiple times to change the temperature is just a stupid idea. I’m looking at you, Mercedes.
Re: The Electronic-Only Door Latch Mechanism Manif (Score: 5, Insightful)
by OrangeTide ( 124937 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2026 @03:51AM (#65965986)
It's ok to criticize a bad idea.