The hidden door handle design, once a signature feature Tesla prided itself on, is now facing unprecedented scrutiny from regulators and the public. Is this avant-garde, minimalist design a necessary innovation or a fatal hazard?
Regulatory investigations are steadily advancing. This past Monday, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced a defect investigation into the emergency door release mechanism of the Tesla Model 3, involving approximately 180,000 2022 Model 3 vehicles. It is crucial to emphasize that, following NHTSA's procedure, this investigation is currently in the preliminary defect petition stage. Over the next three to six months, NHTSA will conduct a technical evaluation, collect and review data related to the issue, determine the frequency of occurrence, assess the severity of the risk, and ultimately decide whether to initiate a formal engineering analysis.
More shockingly, Bloomberg published a significant investigation into Tesla's hidden door handles. The investigation found that over the past decade, at least 15 people have died after accidents because they were unable to open Tesla doors, with more than half of these fatalities occurring in the last year alone. This innovation, once hailed as a revolution in automotive design, is now evolving into a crisis of trust. Whether hidden door handles pose a fatal hazard ultimately requires investigation and determination by U.S. and global regulators.
The latest NHTSA investigation stems from a complaint filed by a Tesla owner, Kevin Clouse. In 2023, his Model 3 caught fire while driving. Unable to locate the hidden mechanical emergency door release, he was forced to kick out a rear window to escape. After his harrowing escape, Clouse filed a complaint with NHTSA. He wrote, "I did not know the location of the hidden mechanical emergency door release because it was not clearly marked, not explained during delivery, and impossible to find immediately in an emergency. I was forced to climb into the back seat and kick out the rear passenger window with my legs to escape, as the car was already on fire." He suffered severe leg injuries as a result.
This is not the first time NHTSA has investigated Tesla's door handle issues, and the problem is not limited to the Model 3. In September of this year, the agency began an investigation into the Model Y's door handles, prompted by 16 reports of exterior handle failures due to low 12-volt battery voltage. Last month, NHTSA expanded its inquiry, demanding that Tesla provide detailed records for all systems related to door handles, door locks, the 12-volt battery, and software for Model 3 and Model Y vehicles from 2017-2022. Failure by Tesla to respond in a timely, accurate, and complete manner could result in fines of up to $27,000 per day, with a potential total maximum of $139 million. As of the afternoon of December 25th U.S. time, Tesla had not publicly responded to the matter nor replied to media requests for comment. Tesla's stock fell 1% on Wednesday, with its market capitalization exceeding $1.6 trillion.
Bloomberg's in-depth investigation is even more alarming, revealing the severity of the door handle problem. These incidents involve nearly all Tesla models, as they all feature hidden door handles. The investigation team obtained NHTSA data on all fatal electric vehicle accidents involving fires between 2012 and 2023, independently investigated cases from 2024 and 2025, and cross-referenced local news reports, law enforcement statements, court documents, accident photos, 911 calls, and police body camera footage. They confirmed that in at least 12 accidents, 15 deceased individuals were unable to escape due to door handle failure.
In November 2024, in Verona, Wisconsin, a Tesla Model S crashed into a tree and caught fire. The driver, Barry Sievers, and four other passengers all perished. A nearby resident who called 911 after the accident explicitly stated on the call that she saw the car on fire and heard screams from inside. In lawsuit documents filed by the families of the deceased, a report from the local sheriff's office indicated that the positioning of the bodies in the front seats suggested a struggle to escape. The lawsuit alleges that two victims survived the initial impact but were trapped inside the burning vehicle due to door handle failure, ultimately succumbing to the rapidly spreading fire.
In the same month, in Piedmont, in the San Francisco Bay Area of California, a Tesla Cybertruck crashed into a tree and a wall, catching fire. Three college students inside died, while one survived. This was the first fatal Cybertruck accident, with the direct cause being the driver's impairment from alcohol and drugs at a party, leading to loss of control. However, the three students did not die directly from the impact. According to autopsy and fire department reports obtained by The Washington Post, they died from the post-crash fire, including smoke inhalation and "thermal injuries" (i.e., burns). The sole survivor was rescued because someone broke a window with a wooden stick and pulled them out.
Photographs from the accident scene also showed pry marks on the Cybertruck's doors, as firefighters attempted to force them open to access the cabin. The attorney for the victims' families stated in the lawsuit that the victims did not die from the impact itself but from asphyxiation after the crash because they could not escape the burning vehicle, with door handle malfunction being a key factor trapping them inside.
In December 2023, in Leesburg, Virginia, a Model Y lost control in the rain and crashed off the road. The vehicle lost power, rendering all electronic door handles inoperative. The driver was knocked unconscious in the crash, and the passenger did not know how to use the mechanical emergency release, trapping them inside. Fortunately, this Model Y did not catch fire. A passing couple came to assist but were also unable to open the doors. They, along with arriving police officers, resorted to using their phones to search YouTube for instructions on how to operate Tesla's emergency release. Police eventually used a tool to pry open a rear window, reach inside to access the driver's door release mechanism, and finally open the door to rescue both occupants.
Why did Tesla choose the hidden door handle design? Bloomberg's investigation also uncovered the story behind the decision. In early 2016, Tesla's design and engineering teams were finalizing the Model 3 design. At that time, Model X owners were already complaining about faulty buttons and sensors. A heated internal debate ensued over whether the Model 3 should use electronic door handles or follow other manufacturers in using mechanical ones. According to multiple current and former Tesla employees interviewed by Bloomberg, CEO Elon Musk is an admirer of Steve Jobs' design philosophy. He greatly appreciates the Apple iPhone, believing its simple, software-driven touchscreen interface is far superior to button-heavy devices like the BlackBerry. Musk wanted the Model 3 to have a similar futuristic design, where everything in the new car should be electronically controlled via buttons or the touchscreen, including the doors. One participant in the discussions revealed that the team raised warnings about the safety risks of the door handles in emergencies, but Musk held his ground and ultimately decided to proceed with the hidden handles. He articulated his design philosophy in 2021, stating, "I think generally speaking, any input is an error. If you have to do something that the car could have done automatically, it should be handled by software."
This philosophy is evident in almost every Tesla model. The Model S pioneered auto-presenting door handles that extend from the door as the owner approaches and retract when they leave. The Model X went further, with front doors that can open automatically upon sensing the key fob or phone. The Cybertruck even eliminated exterior handles entirely, replacing them with buttons in the lower corner of the windows. Tesla and its supporters have claimed that hidden door handles improve aerodynamics, reduce drag, and increase driving range—a significant perceived advantage in the electric vehicle era. However, research by the automotive industry organization SAE indicates that the aerodynamic impact of hidden door handles is minimal, reducing the drag coefficient by only about 0.01, equivalent to saving approximately 0.6 kWh per 100 kilometers. Meanwhile, the added weight from the motors, actuators, and related mechanical structures might offset any aerodynamic gains. Perhaps Tesla insisted on hidden door handles primarily for Musk's minimalist aesthetic, making Teslas look cooler. In his own words, it's about making users feel "like you're part of the future."
With the 2012 Model S, Tesla first introduced hidden door handles. As a trendsetter in automotive cool factor, this design quickly became a signature feature for electric and luxury vehicles. Industry analysis suggests that approximately 70 models currently available in the U.S. market employ electronic door handle technology, including the Rivian pickup truck, several Land Rover SUVs, the Porsche 911 and Taycan, Audi models, the Fisker Ocean, and the Ford Mustang Mach-E. A similar trend is evident among Chinese EV startups. Data from early 2025 shows that nearly 60% of the top 100 best-selling new energy vehicles in China feature electronic door handles. For a time, it seemed an electric vehicle *without* hidden handles was the outlier. Why are so many automakers following Tesla's lead? Several factors likely contribute: 1. Premiumization and differentiation. In the high-end market, unique design is a key purchasing factor, and hidden handles provide visual appeal distinct from traditional cars. 2. Showcasing technological sophistication. Hidden handles can integrate with keyless entry, auto-presentation systems, and other advanced features, aligning with the futuristic image of smart cars. 3. Declining costs through普及. As production technology matures and economies of scale are achieved, the cost of hidden handles has dropped significantly, moving them from luxury exclusivity to mainstream models.
In reality, industry safety experts and engineers have long criticized hidden door handles, but their concerns did not gain sufficient traction until recent accidents drew regulatory attention. Professor Phil Koopman from Carnegie Mellon University's Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, a renowned expert in autonomous vehicle safety and a veteran in human factors engineering, has publicly criticized Tesla's door handle design. "As a computer expert who has spent a lot of time learning human factors engineering, I simply can't imagine how anyone could make a consumer product that requires an instruction manual to save your life," he said. "An ordinary person sitting in the back seat of a Tesla, trying to use these cryptic emergency escape systems—some cars don't even have labels. You can't expect ordinary people to get it right in that [emergency] situation." Keith Barry, an automotive safety reporter for the U.S. industry organization Consumer Reports, once published a detailed guide teaching owners how to escape when electronic handles fail. But he also noted that these hidden handles create significant difficulties in emergencies. He pointed out, "Unlike simple, familiar mechanical latches, exterior door handles on cars are now often flush with the door panel and require a motor to open. Inside many new cars, door handles have been replaced by buttons that require power and a motor to function. Worse, if the car loses power or is in a collision, these electronic handles may not work. While internal manual emergency releases exist, they can be difficult to find or operate—especially for panicked passengers." Prominent U.S. automotive product liability attorney Merick Lewin directly addressed the Tesla Cybertruck in an interview. "When you market a car as being almost indestructible, even demonstrating it withstanding hammer blows and blocking bullets at the launch event... but when you market it that way, you obviously have to think: if there is a crash, how do rescuers open the doors to save people?"
Testing by the China Insurance Automotive Safety Index (C-IASI) showed that vehicles equipped with electronic door handles had only a 67% success rate for doors popping open in side-impact collisions, far lower than the 98% rate for traditional mechanical handles. The National Accident In-depth Investigation System (NAIS) in China reported a 47% increase in accidents in 2024 caused by door handle failures, with hidden handles accounting for 82% of these incidents.
Facing mounting public criticism and regulatory pressure, Tesla has begun implementing some remedial measures, though many experts consider them insufficient. In September 2025, Tesla's chief designer, Franz von Holzhausen, revealed in an interview with Bloomberg that Tesla is redesigning its door handles, planning to integrate the electronic and mechanical release mechanisms into a single device. He acknowledged this decision aims to make it easier for passengers to open doors "in a panic situation." While Tesla has not directly admitted that its previous design constitutes a safety defect requiring responsibility, nor mentioned potential vehicle recalls, this statement undoubtedly indicates the company recognizes that hidden door handles are not conducive to passenger escape in crash scenarios. Furthermore, Tesla just last week updated the safety page on its website, stating, "When you are in your Tesla and a severe collision is detected, your hazard lights will turn on automatically, your doors will unlock automatically, and in some regions, your vehicle will automatically call 911 and relay information to the operator so emergency services can arrive as quickly as possible." However, this significant safety update was not proactively communicated to owners but quietly placed on the website, meaning most owners are likely unaware of the change. Additionally, Tesla did not disclose whether the automatic unlocking feature applies to all vehicles, noting that "features may not be available in all regions or for all vehicles, or may depend on manufacturing date."
The location of the mechanical release mechanism varies across Tesla models. For front doors, it is typically near the electronic switch button, ahead of the window switches. However, the emergency release for rear doors is often hidden behind speaker grilles or at the bottom of storage compartments, requiring the removal of a small cover to access. This poses a greater challenge for rear passengers, who are typically less familiar with Tesla's unique feature layout. Moreover, even when mechanical releases are present, most passengers are completely unaware of their existence because Tesla does not provide necessary proactive education to owners, let alone expect them to find these inconspicuous devices amidst fire and smoke. A 2024 random street interview conducted by FOX TV in Phoenix, Arizona, found that several Tesla owners were unclear about the location of their car's mechanical release. The Tesla owner who filed the NHTSA complaint, Kevin Clouse, also stated in his filing, "I did not know the location of the hidden mechanical emergency door release because it was not clearly marked, not explained during delivery, and not intuitive in an emergency."
Confronted with growing safety concerns, some automakers are beginning to reconsider their decision to follow Tesla's hidden handle trend and are starting to implement fixes and redesigns. As part of a recall this year, Ford updated the software for the Mustang Mach-E to ensure door handles remain powered for an additional 12 minutes even after the small battery that powers them is depleted. Rivian is redesigning its doors. The company plans to incorporate "a more clearly visible manual release located near the electric interior handle" in the rear doors of its upcoming R2 SUV. Ultimately, large-scale safety standard adjustments require impetus from industry regulators. Although NHTSA has launched multiple investigations, it has yet to take decisive action or compel Tesla to make improvements. However, the increasing number of accident lawsuits may pressure both regulators and manufacturers to enact change, adopt stricter safety standards, or even abandon the trendy hidden door handle design altogether.
As the Bloomberg investigation pointed out, they only tracked 15 lives lost due to this issue, but the scale of the problem may be far greater than known. No authoritative body systematically tracks how many people have been trapped by doors they cannot open, as it is difficult to determine what happens in the moments following a crash. It is a fact that Tesla performs excellently in crash tests, offering high levels of occupant protection. However, no relevant test currently evaluates whether survivors can escape a crashed vehicle in time. This exposes a significant blind spot in the current automotive safety assessment system: it focuses on crash prevention but neglects the ease of passenger escape. At the very least, one point should be consensus: in the critical moments following an accident, when lives are at stake, everyone inside a vehicle should have a simple and fast means of escape.
