I drive a VW ID.3, and while it has traditional door handles, there is a feature that drives me crazy: it auto-locks the doors when you start driving. There is no way to turn this off. In case of a crash, the doors won't open from the outside. But they will also not open from the inside in case the electronics related to the central locking is damaged in the crash. I don't understand how this is considered a safety feature.
In every single other car I'd driven there was a way to permanently disable such feature. Not in ID.3.
All modern cars have been locking the doors for the last 20 years or so, as far as I know. At least here in Western Europe.
The door handles still work from the inside, they mechanically unlock the door unconditionally, meaning nobody can be trapped inside even by manually locking the doors.
The exception is if you flip the "child safety" switch which disconnects the inside door handle of the rear doors.
The Civic Touring is/was high end, and rather more expensive.
Mine is a cheaper, european model, which if you are willing to pay for it, of course have all the fancy stuff like keyless ignition, auto door locks, auto high beam system, security systems etc as addons to the standard model.
>All modern cars have been locking the doors for the last 20 years or so, as far as I know.
Yeah, and I would always disable that feature. Perhaps that was wrong to do, and now that I don't have a choice it's actually safer for me and my passengers.
I hate this "feature". Was there a rash of children jumping out of cars that lead to its creation? It just seems like such a narrow set of facts where a child is big and smart enough to open the door but dumb enough to jump out and get seriously hurt. Opening a moving car door is presumably quite difficult given the aerodynamic pressure on the body. So the car would have to be moving rather slow and yet turning and moving fast enough that the child couldn't avoid disaster.
If you're talking about the child safety, it's unrelated to door locking.
It prevents children from exiting the car before an adult can ensure it is safe to do so. Mostly to prevent the child getting run over by a passing car, or dooring a passing bicycle. If you don't like it you can just not enable it.
Yes, and actually this makes a ton of sense. I perceive the risk of my children opening and falling out of the moving car as low relative to being trapped in a car in a bad situation. But I could absolutely see the idiots trying to bolt 0.28273 seconds after I put the car in park. I'll update my thinking.
> Opening a moving car door is presumably quite difficult given the aerodynamic pressure on the body. So the car would have to be moving rather slow
Actually, no - at least not slow by my definition.
You’d have to drive over 130km/h, this is when you need some serious force to open the door more than maybe 10-20cm - but anything slower than that, it’s still pretty easy, certainly easy enough for a kid to open the door wide enough to fall out or get in serious trouble..
Source: 18 year old stupid me and buddies, doing stuff like opening driving cars doors, going over 100km/h
You may be on to something. I drove a BMW that, when the electric window position sensors went bad, the whole car went into limp mode and didn't let you accelerate over a certain speed. I imagine the rationale being out could not verify the windows were not down? Crazy still... the first and only BMW. I should have stuck to old Nissans
Things go wrong on cars, it doesn't mean they're bad as a brand. I loved my BMW. Have a Volvo now and apart from the slightly crap entertainment software I love it. They're replaced the software with carplay in the newer models, and updated older models, but alas they can't update my model due to a hardware mismatch.
It's the cars where things constantly go wrong that you should avoid. Jags + Land Rovers have those reputations in the UK.
It's fine that a window position sensor might eventually fail on a car. It's not fine that a window position sensor causes the car to limit its maximum speed.
It was less that it went wrong, and more that when something small went wrong it became a complex issue due to how the system was built, and how it handled a module failure.
The car was entirely capable of continuing to operate normally, but the operator is not trusted by BMW. Their ecosystem locks out the owner from easily maintaining their car as well, which made even more painful as I had no trouble identifying and sourcing a new module.
> It just seems like such a narrow set of facts where a child is big and smart enough to open the door but dumb enough to jump out and get seriously hurt.
I had to guess, I'd guess you aren't a parent or spend much time interacting with children :)
Also, auto-lock reduces theft and carjacking risk, which is nice.
I'm talking about child locks, not auto-lock. Locking the door from the inside. A commenter above suggests that it's to stop the little idiots from popping out into the middle of the street .7845 seconds after I put it in park. That actually makes some sense.
Ah got it. The conversation upthread had focused on auto-lock, and someone had mentioned child locks in passing, and my read of your comment was on the auto-lock on shift to drive (or on starting to move). And my bad for falsely guessing you weren't speaking from personal experience!
A friend's 3 year old absolutely opened the door last year while we were driving. Luckily she was strapped in her car seat, but otherwise could've easily fallen out.
I'm renting a 2025 Chevy Malibu sedan in the U.S. right now, and for the driver door, I have to pull the handle twice. The first pull unlocks it, the second pull opens it. I think it is digital and not mechanical.
There is no mechanical lock I can pull on, just a push button with a light to indicate that the door is locked. I hate this car.
I thought that about my car (a Honda) as well, having not RTFM. In this case at least, there's a touch sensor on the inside of the handle. Lay hand on it, wait half a second to unlock, pull. No double pull needed.
> Automatic Door Locking (ADL): System in the vehicle whereby the door
latches automatically lock once the vehicle has reached a certain speed. They
should also automatically unlock in the event of an accident, post impact.
They also have a section for electric retractable door handles (5.3), including
> It is assumed that by design the door handles will extend outwards ready for use when the SRS system deploys any airbag/detects a severe impact or the door handle remains in its retracted position but can be grabbed nevertheless by the first responder without any tool.
I wonder if Tesla's don't do this? Or if it didn't in this case?
Honestly, not sure. I think this is open to interpretation (and maybe is clarified elsewhere in their documentation).
Euro NCAP is a voluntary assessment program, so I believe all of these are just recommendations that will impact a vehicles scoring rather than mandatory safety standards.
That, presumably, is an electronic/computerized feature, not mechanical. So if the car is damaged enough to not have electricity, or that board was damaged in whatever caused the airbags to deploy, then the doors won't automatically unlock.
Given the kinds of things that could make an airbag go off, I wouldn't bet on that feature working when needed.
>Given the kinds of things that could make an airbag go off, I wouldn't bet on that feature working when needed.
As 3D30497420 said, this is part of Euro NCAP. They test for exactly this [1]. Why would you assume a safety system wouldn’t work?
[1] “If ADL is fitted as standard and by default always on then the doors will be locked by the lab personnel prior to ALL full-scale tests… Post-test the lab personnel will immediately check if any of the side doors inthe front crash tests and any of the non-struck side doors in the side crash tests has remained locked/has not automatically unlocked.” https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/43396/euro-ncap-rescue-extric...
There are crash sensors to trigger air bags, pre-tension seatbelts, cut off the fuel pump and so on. You would think that some engineer must have thought about auto-unlocking doors!
The reasoning behind the auto-locking feature is that when the doors are locked it adds to rigidity of the car and thus decreases the likelyhood of the passanger cabin collapsing on the occupants. Auto unlocking the doors would completely defeat the reason for that feature.
The actual mechanism of how the door works as kind of "configurable deformation zone" usually involves somewhat thick steel rod running down the middle of the door that on hinge side abbuts similar strength member in the chasis and on the latch side connects to the latch. The latch has two distinct positions depending on whether the door is just latched or locked and the only latched position is not strong enough to hold the potential impact forces..
Huh! Autolocking behavior has bothered me for as long as I remember seeing it, and I’d love to believe that it improves safety against crashes (rather than notional “bad guys trying to open the door on your journey” or something). It’s only ever inconvenienced me, never helped.
I’m having trouble finding more formal explanations for what you’re describing, though. I see a lot of talk about how the latching behavior links the door’s steel into the rest of the body, but very little about the structural aspects of the locks that link the handles to the latch’s release mechanism.
I’m the farthest thing from a car engineer, but I wonder if you’d know of anyplace I could read more about this structural aspect of locking design? Every time I accidentally lock out a passenger, I get frustrated: I’d find grace and patience easier to muster if I understood how someday it might save both our lives :)
I am also not a car engineer, but from my reading of "Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Door Locks and Door Retention Components" [1] it is the latching that is meant to prevent the door opening, not the locks. However, even many modern cars have a mechanical linkage from the handle to the door. In a crash the mechanical linkage, particularly older style tension-type linkages, could unlatch the door when your body hit the door from the inside and physically moved the linkage [2]. A lot of doors use electric actuators now [3], and linkages are much better designed, but it seems like it could still be an issue, in theory.
This has been around for 20+ years. It's a security feature that can often be disabled like here after Googling for 3 seconds: https://www.bitauto.com/ask/100122848912/ For safety, it's generally recommended to leave it on unless you want involuntary passengers.
I don’t know what this site is, looks like AI generated slop to be honest, but I can say that I have not found neither the option to disable it, not any report by any ID.3 forum user OR a corresponding entry in the user manual that would confirm the presence of this feature.
IIRC...on my older VW there is a way to set this to disable but it requires using OBDeleven/VCDS (or similar) via the CANBUS.
Typically, there are a few different options of things you can enable/disable that have no other menu options. OBDeleven has "one touch apps" that makes this easy...but there is also other ways to do things using the adaptations or long coding.
If you do any work on your own car having something like OBDeleven is pretty much required. You can't even change the rear brake pads without it.
I am not sure. The driver's door handle unlocks all 4 doors, so at least that path is electronic. But I hope yes, each door's handle can also unlock the corresponding door's lock mechanically.
As a tech person I've been in enough meetings where some tech nerd was aggressively driving forward a dementedly overcomplicated and perspective lacking solution to know that the last thing these types want is a solved problem.
To them, a wheel is detestable -because it's simple and easy to use, and they've got some idea of a superior complex polyhedron that's of course better and everyone else is dumb for not using it.
It would be good if we could trace whatever technical dog shit killed these poor little kids back to whoever was involved, and... "offer them a non-technical solution to the causal factors".
I'm now imagining a developer telling a room of product managers that the car needs to run react on kubernetes and everyone just nodding along because they've heard those words before.
I imagine the nerd confidently standing up in meeting room, his eyes wide with a psychotic look of conviction, stating with vehement certainly: "they wouldn't be dead if we'd written it in Rust!".
But yeah, the 50 something checked out MBAs - just waiting for the end to the farce that was their "career" - would be nodding along.
Guaranteed every Tesla owner (Model 3/Y at least, I haven't seen the others) has had to explain to new passengers how to properly open the door and to use the button to exit and NOT the obvious handle.
Meanwhile how many times in one's life as a non-Tesla-owner have you had to explain to someone how to open a car door?
They do say they're a tech company and not a car company, eh?
Unfortunately not, I used that advice for three brand-new purchased Honda’s: a Fit, a Cr-V, and an Odyssey Touring Elite Minivan. The CRV was the last Honda I will ever buy. Honda stuffed too many computers into the car and it would kill the battery after one day. This is when I was traveling for work, making the vehicle useless. Honda dealer said “that’s how they all are now, because of the electronics the battery dies every few days” and they even claimed that they go around charging up all the vehicles on the lot with a portable battery charger every day because of it! Absolutely a lemon brand now. These companies just have a huge disrespect for software and quality in technology.
Elon like to think he innovates when he just changes stuff for no reason that carmakers figured out a century ago. Anyone that has used the turn signals or wipers in a Tesla understands how stupid it is.
There’s a Neil Postman talk from the late 90s where he voiced his disdain for and resistance against automatic windows while purchasing a new car. He was on to something.
When I have driven cars with electronic door poppers, I found them to be a downgrade from traditional mechanical door handles. It's even possible to make the latter sit flush, and cars have been doing it since at least the 1960s.
I'm all for trying new things in the hope that there might be a better way, but make sure it's actually better before putting it into a volume product where it has safety implications.
in aircraft design there is something called the "failure mode", and every last possible thing is considered and reviewed from all possible scenarios and accident reviews.
so things like wing bolts are obvious, but the door handles are also approved, and how the carpet is held down, as if it comes loose, and rumpples up under the rudder pedals, you die, and on and on and on.
recently been a spate of helicopter accidents where loose objects (personal kit), have jammed controls, and the problem becomes, do you ban (shift blame) loose objects, or go all in and test and design for unjammable controlls.....which will require a slightly larger cabin with greater clearances, and controlls that are fully covered and therefor a bit heavier and harder to service.....which comes with it's own risks
Regulation in Europe mandate that doors have to unlock when airbags are triggered. If the model involved was legal in the EU, it was either a mechanical issue or an electronic one, and maybe not exclusively Tesla's fault, but it was caused by their poor engineering/assembly practices.
If it's in the US and they have no regulations on this, I don't want to be cavalier but they should reflect on their anti-regulation culture, and Tesla does not deserve to be scapegoated (not a fan of the brand, but I try to be consistent).
Despite how horrific this is it doesn’t tell us what really happened. Doors can get stuck in any car after an accident. Teslas are very controversial today for obvious reasons so every time there’s some tragic news the brand has to be mentioned. Like recently they found a dismembered body of a woman and of course it was found inside a Tesla. In any case the lack of handles should not be a problem as there’s a latch inside which is easy to access and operate. It’s up to each car user to get familiar with the car to drive it safely.
The Model S and X have truly retractable door handles. The Model 3 and Y have flush door handles that you need to push in to get the latch to pull out. As far as I know, the 3/Y handles should work with the power disconnected; although many people who haven't ridden in one don't know that you need to push, then pull, the handle. (And probably won't figure it out when panicking.)
I don't know if there's a way to bypass the S/X handles. My Ioniq 9 has retractable handles, and if you push on one corner of the driver's door handle you can work it out. I don't know about the other doors, and I don't think someone could figure it out if panicking.
The Model 3 and Y handles do not work with the power disconnected. The article says that it was a Model Y that they were unable to open. My Model 3 had a power issue and the doors would not open.
Maybe I’m under-thinking this problem, but they couldn’t just break the window? Nobody wants to get hit with broken glass, but I’ll take some cuts over being burned alive.
Virtually all cars (except maybe Cybertrucks and armored vehicles) use tempered glass for side windows. This is how first responders do it. Sometimes, in roll-over and very bad accidents, the windshield or the back window have to be used, but this can take a lot more effort.
Joerg Sprave from Slingshot channel designed and is selling new type of glass breaking hammer that has foldable car glass saw.
Sounds like the same window hammer what my uncle had in the glove box of his 1971 Cadillac, next to his cigarettes and his gun. He said each was for use in different types of emergencies.
> According to the German Automobile Association, manual opening is only possible from the inside, which complicates rescue attempts for emergency services.
The issue, other than complicated internal release, was the lack of an external way to manually open the doors. (e.g.: driver is unconscious with small kids who haven't read the manual)
good example of where regulation is useful - there's zero reason for idiots to be making things like this worse, no matter what dumb justification they have. people shouldn't have to bear in mind "is this the one that burns you alive if the door power goes out or they ship a door software bug?" when shopping.
It is why I have asked those in my family to never enter a Tesla. If I ever get a Tesla for Uber/Lyft, I immediately cancel it. Also, if Tesla's cars are this bad, its robots could only be worse.
These vehicles are a menace. The fact that this can even happen is horrifying ... there is no more painful and horrible way to die then to be burned alive. This was a father and his two children. I cannot believe people are still buying Teslas, especially with this Nazi leader of theirs, and especially in Germany.
I don't have numbers for you, but the answer is likely of the order "almost always after a rollover". The cage will protect the occupants from being crushed, not the high-tolerance door and hinge clearances. And rollovers are common.
Again, the confirmation of priors effect is extremely strong here. People are leaping from "Tesla manual door handles are difficult to open from inside the cabin" to "All Tesla accidents are the fault of the interior door handles".
Of course you can very often open doors after a rollover, maybe it's very different in US cars but here we have complete stress and collision tests, and if doors can't be opened after a rollover, your car won't pass and won't be sold on the European market (unless you get an exemption for collection/luxury vehicles, but Tesla won't qualify).
Citation? I've never heard of such a test. The opposite is routinely tested: making sure doors don't pop open (and potentially eject occupants) during rollovers. Demanding the very tightly engineered door mechanisms to survive that kind of stress and remain operable with mere handles simply isn't feasible. Even in Europe.
In the cases cited in the English article, the driver doors were supposedly not crushed, and someone on the inside would have been able to open it, had the handles worked as expected.
Defending deadly design is a really weird hill to die on. Your false idol is actually just an idiot, and I know it stings the pride to admit you fell for it, but doubling down isn't the way forward.
No flag from me, situations like what you described are why the “jaws of life” were invented. It allows rescuers to cut through a crushed car to reach the crash victims.
I live near an intersection where the road design encourages people to speed, and there's an accident about month. So far I've encountered flipped over cars, cars wrapped around mapposts, embedded in walls, and cars on fire. I've been first on the scene in a lot of accidents, around 40 over the years. Never once have I been unable to get the door open to talk to the driver and help them out of the vehicle.
Why does the title have "Burnend"? As far as I can tell, there's a Burnend distillery that produces Scotch Whisky, but I fail to see the connection with Teslas.
In every single other car I'd driven there was a way to permanently disable such feature. Not in ID.3.