[UPDATED] 2 die in Tesla crash - NHTSA reports driver seat occupied

[gnuarm]

This post was linked to today, and it was interesting that the local news in the SF Bay Area ran a story several times of cars with driver assist systems crashing into a white car in the rain, which is becoming a "thing" here.. Several brands of cars were shown crashing, and not one was a Tesla. Hmmmm... maybe they couldn't get it to crash. No mention at all. Sort of seems like anything good about them is excluded, but no drama, no news. Who want's to see a car not crash on the news, except..... everybody. I think all car crashes should be on a dedicated channel, called, say, Rubberneck. Such a channel might improve traffic flow.

You mean like daily reporting of Covid deaths results in people taking precautions and lowering the infection/death rate?

 

[gnuarm]

Designers have a bunch of different concerns to balance before they consider emergencies. For most people. keeping a emergency window smasher or two in the car probably would be much more useful than stressing out over the rear doors, as plenty of accidents would have the doors deformed such that you can't open them anyways regardless of a manual latch.

The window break tool is pretty worthless in a serious accident because it won't be accessible. I've been in a serious accident and it is VERY difficult to keep in mind everything you need to be aware of, especially if you have a concussion which is not at all uncommon. Then there is the issue of what happens to the tool in an accident. They are often kept in door pockets and would likely be jarred out in a serious accident. The only way they will be universally useful is for them to be universally attached to the seat belt in every car so they become a part of our universal awareness.

 

[MikeyC]

The window break tool is pretty worthless in a serious accident because it won't be accessible. I've been in a serious accident and it is VERY difficult to keep in mind everything you need to be aware of, especially if you have a concussion which is not at all uncommon. Then there is the issue of what happens to the tool in an accident. They are often kept in door pockets and would likely be jarred out in a serious accident. The only way they will be universally useful is for them to be universally attached to the seat belt in every car so they become a part of our universal awareness.

I keep mine in the center console. I figure if that's crushed to the point I can't open it, I'm probably dead anyway.

Mike

 

[gnuarm]

I keep mine in the center console. I figure if that's crushed to the point I can't open it, I'm probably dead anyway.

Mike

That may or may not help. I was trying to remove my seat belt by reaching on my left side. The seat belt buckle is on the right. I never got it off, someone who helped me unbuckled it.

Serious car accidents are nothing like normal reality.

 

[stopcrazypp]

How does the manual handle in the front doors of an X open the window as required to open the door?

Don't own an X so don't know, but given even lower end cars like the Model 3/Y have been updated to lower the window (presuming car has power), I imagine the X also does that. The Model 3/Y uses the door ajar sensor to do that. Given Model X has auto open doors, I imaging the sensors are even more precise.

Even if that's true, it's still a very poor way to exit a burning car. Many passengers would not be able to do that. Don't think everyone in the world is the same as you.

It may be the only way to exit the car in many cases, especially with child locks. The Model X having those falcon wing doors makes rear door exit even more of a variable, so planning an exit through the front is a good idea and may save your life.

Then there is the issue of education. I don't relish having to tell everyone who rides in the back seat of my model X to pull off the speaker cover and pull the tiny ball on the wire to open the door after a crash and they are trying to get out.

As discussed, it's a balance of risk of people pulling it in daily use when you don't want them to (like how Model 3 has the front door manual releases too visible/easy to pull) vs having to figure it out in an emergency.

Did I mention that my rear doors failed to open for a passenger once? I had not owned the car long and the inside open button didn't work. I got out and tried the outside button which didn't work. Finally I used the touch screen which did work. Yeah, that didn't leave a favorable impression.

Anytime you have actuated doors like the Falcon Wings (or even a minivan sliding door) there is a chance that the buttons don't respond (Falcon Wing also has ultrasonic sensors that can block door opening). It's just the nature of the beast.

What they do in other cars has no bearing on the issue. We are discussing Teslas. If you go down that road we'll end up with a V8 and a 5 speed in my model X. At least it would be lighter.

I'm responding to the implication that there will be regulatory pressure or legal pressure to change. If there are plenty of other cars that are way worse, why would anyone expect Tesla to have any pressure to change? It's a way different case if Tesla were the only vehicles where it's harder to exit the back seats.

You are lucky to even get a rear manual door release, Model 3 doesn't even have them (Tesla may have added ones to Model Y). Given the volume of Model 3 Tesla have sold, if this was a serious problem, I would expect it would show up with the Model 3 first just due to probabilities.

 

[gnuarm]

Don't own an X so don't know, but given even lower end cars like the Model 3/Y have been updated to lower the window (presuming car has power), I imagine the X also does that. The Model 3/Y uses the door ajar sensor to do that. Given Model X has auto open doors, I imaging the sensors are even more precise.

Why would you presume the car has power??? If it has power, there's likely no need for a manual door release anyway.

It may be the only way to exit the car in many cases, especially with child locks. The Model X having those falcon wing doors makes rear door exit even more of a variable, so planning an exit through the front is a good idea and may save your life.

I think you really don't grasp the concept. The first issue is that no small number of people will simply not be capable of climbing through from one seat to the other. The other issue is that it is not reasonable to expect everyone in the car will be "trained" to climb to the front seat to exit the car in an emergency. People panic easily, not because they are weak in any way, but because being trapped is exactly the sort of thing that causes panic.

So please stop talking nonsense about "training" people. This reminds me of the Congressional inquiry into safety in autos in the 60's where an automotive executive talked about training his kids to brace against the dash board with their arms when he yelled, "ARMS!"

As discussed, it's a balance of risk of people pulling it in daily use when you don't want them to (like how Model 3 has the front door manual releases too visible/easy to pull) vs having to figure it out in an emergency.

Or simply designing the cars so they do not require special training to exit in an emergency. The glass brake tool is intended for those accidents where doors are jammed, not for cars that are designed in ways that prevent exit because of an electrical failure. What is wrong with a manual door release that releases the door? It's not the frameless window. I've seen frameless designs that don't require lowering the window to open the door.

Anytime you have actuated doors like the Falcon Wings (or even a minivan sliding door) there is a chance that the buttons don't respond (Falcon Wing also has ultrasonic sensors that can block door opening). It's just the nature of the beast.

No, it's only the nature of the beast when it is designed so the sensors fall off the door or the buttons break. I understand the model S has a weak part in the door handle that costs hundreds of dollars to have fixed and it just continues to break. It's one thing to design a flaw, but to continue to make the same flawed part is not excusable, especially in a $100,000 car.

I'm responding to the implication that there will be regulatory pressure or legal pressure to change. If there are plenty of other cars that are way worse, why would anyone expect Tesla to have any pressure to change? It's a way different case if Tesla were the only vehicles where it's harder to exit the back seats.

Again, other cars are not the issue. Many, many cars had serious design defects that cost lives in the 60s and 70s, but Ford got their asses sued off because of the Pinto mostly because it was an easy case to prove. Same here.

You are lucky to even get a rear manual door release, Model 3 doesn't even have them (Tesla may have added ones to Model Y). Given the volume of Model 3 Tesla have sold, if this was a serious problem, I would expect it would show up with the Model 3 first just due to probabilities.

I feel so special that my death trap doors are not as bad as your death trap doors. How many Pintos did they sell before the law suits started rolling in? These days there are Federal agencies that tend to be the tip of the spear for this sort of thing. We'll see how they handle it. With the publicity of EV fires (deserved or not) difficult to open doors get attention very readily. This is not a closed matter.

 

[nvx1977]

I understand the model S has a weak part in the door handle that costs hundreds of dollars to have fixed and it just continues to break. It's one thing to design a flaw, but to continue to make the same flawed part is not excusable, especially in a $100,000 car.

This might have been true a while back, but 3rd and 4th revision of the door handles are solid. My 2014 S had v1 handles. The mobile tech walked me through the failure point (a thin wire that was wiggled each time the door actuated, eventually causing it to break) of the old handle, then showed me the new ones (both revision 3 and 4) where the new design was unaffected by the actuations, among a slew of other improvements. Not sure why you think they keep making the same flawed part. The replacement handles have lasted longer than the originals at this point.

 

[Krash]

…I understand the model S has a weak part in the door handle that costs hundreds of dollars to have fixed and it just continues to break…

That door handle had a design flaw, gears I believe, that was fixed a long time ago. My 2017 S with 90,000 miles has never had handle problems.

Like the drive unit bearing pitting issue, some issues don’t surface right away.

 

[gnuarm]

This might have been true a while back, but 3rd and 4th revision of the door handles are solid. My 2014 S had v1 handles. The mobile tech walked me through the failure point (a thin wire that was wiggled each time the door actuated, eventually causing it to break) of the old handle, then showed me the new ones (both revision 3 and 4) where the new design was unaffected by the actuations, among a slew of other improvements. Not sure why you think they keep making the same flawed part. The replacement handles have lasted longer than the originals at this point.

So how do they convey the electrical contact without wiggling the wire? Do they use a spring contact now?

I don't try to spread misinformation, but my info appears to be out of date.

What I do know is that it has been very hard to get intermittent problems fixed on my car. They simply won't put these issues on the ticket unless I can demonstrate them at the time I drop off the car. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to have paid so much for a car and to receive worse treatment than if I had bought a Corolla.

 

[Electroman]

What I do know is that it has been very hard to get intermittent problems fixed on my car. They simply won't put these issues on the ticket unless I can demonstrate them at the time I drop off the car.

That is true for any car. If you can't reproduce it easily and if they can't either there is not much they can do. Unfortunately this is true for any car any brand.

 

[gnuarm]

That is true for any car. If you can't reproduce it easily and if they can't either there is not much they can do. Unfortunately this is true for any car any brand.

That is simply not true. I have had intermittent issues with cars before and they manage to diagnose the fault. In the case of the rear doors not opening the tech I first talked to about it diagnosed the problem simply from my description. But I had forgotten to put it on the ticket, so we had that conversation when I was picking up the car and he said next time I bring it in they would reattach the ultrasonic sensor as they often fall off. When I brought it in because there was no record of the conversation they would not put the problem on the ticket. I've taken video of the main console and the door showing the sensors failing with nothing near the door. They don't care. Clearly they are stiff arming me so they don't have to pay for a repair.

Then there was the passenger side mirror that would not unfold from the car. I called the 800 number where the tech was able to query the car remotely telling me the car was not reporting that I had a right side mirror! Even with that information the service center would not replace the mirror.

I didn't buy a Toyota Corolla. I don't expect worse treatment than if I had bought a Corolla. I could have bought half a dozen Corollas for what I paid for this lemon.

 

[nvx1977]

So how do they convey the electrical contact without wiggling the wire? Do they use a spring contact now?

I don't try to spread misinformation, but my info appears to be out of date.

What I do know is that it has been very hard to get intermittent problems fixed on my car. They simply won't put these issues on the ticket unless I can demonstrate them at the time I drop off the car. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to have paid so much for a car and to receive worse treatment than if I had bought a Corolla.

sorry, it's been years since the replacement, so I don't remember how the wiring was redesigned. I just remember being shown the new design, and the mobile tech walked me thru the changes, and I was convinced the new design would not fail like it did before.

Door Handle Problems with Tesla Model S – How to fix / parts / consumer rights etc - Tesla Owners UK

The Model S has one of the lowest aerodynamic drag figures of any production car. Retracting door handles help achieve this. They retract when the car starts to move, and open automatically when a key holder approaches the driver’s door. After a delay of about a minute, if nothing else...

teslaowners.org.uk

Gen 3 door handles

New revision out.

teslamotorsclub.com

sorry for going off topic.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Why would you presume the car has power??? If it has power, there's likely no need for a manual door release anyway.

I'm talking about in normal use when you accidentally or purposefully activate the manual releases. The Model 3/Y pops down the window using the door ajar sensor (was changed in an update after people complained about damaging trim). That makes so you only risk doing so when the car has no power, in which case, damaging the trim is a small price to pay (as most likely it's an emergency).

I think you really don't grasp the concept. The first issue is that no small number of people will simply not be capable of climbing through from one seat to the other. The other issue is that it is not reasonable to expect everyone in the car will be "trained" to climb to the front seat to exit the car in an emergency. People panic easily, not because they are weak in any way, but because being trapped is exactly the sort of thing that causes panic.

So please stop talking nonsense about "training" people. This reminds me of the Congressional inquiry into safety in autos in the 60's where an automotive executive talked about training his kids to brace against the dash board with their arms when he yelled, "ARMS!"

I'm not talking about training people, just making them aware that's likely the most viable exit method in many cases, instead of wasting time struggling to open the rear doors.

Or simply designing the cars so they do not require special training to exit in an emergency. The glass brake tool is intended for those accidents where doors are jammed, not for cars that are designed in ways that prevent exit because of an electrical failure.

It's irrelevant if the inability of the door to open is because the door is jammed/deformed, the internal latch mechanism broke, the door handle broke, child locks are on, an electrical failure, or any other reason why you can't open the door, the glass break tool gives you an extra option to exit the vehicle, if that is a huge concern for you.

What is wrong with a manual door release that releases the door? It's not the frameless window.

It's definitely the reason in the Model 3/Y however, as it uses a design where the trim/weather seal can be damaged if you don't let the window drop. Using an electronic release ensures that never happens, as it allows the car to always drop the window before the door is pushed open. Then there is a secondary manual release for the front doors for emergencies. This design is not unique to Tesla, and had been used before in other cars.

I've seen frameless designs that don't require lowering the window to open the door.

I remember reading an article in the past that mentioned frameless designs that don't drop the windows (couldn't find it again in my search), and there were compromises made in those kinds of designs (don't remember if it was wind noise or weather sealing), which is why most frameless designs today slip the windows into the trim/seal (and drop the windows down slightly when opening). It's a balance of issues to consider in engineering. That's the point I'm trying to make. You aren't only considering one thing in a design: namely exiting the vehicle without power (which is something that rarely happens), you also have to consider the factors that affect daily use and may be far more significant for most users (like louder wind noise, worse weather sealing, or increased door opening resistance).

No, it's only the nature of the beast when it is designed so the sensors fall off the door or the buttons break. I understand the model S has a weak part in the door handle that costs hundreds of dollars to have fixed and it just continues to break. It's one thing to design a flaw, but to continue to make the same flawed part is not excusable, especially in a $100,000 car.

Others already point out actually Tesla had gone through multiple revisions of the Model S door handle design. The latest part eliminates many components in the design and makes the part much simpler and less prone to failure.
Here's a great video that goes over the changes if you are interested in the engineering:

In the Model S case, that handle design was mostly gimmick (could have been replaced by a much simpler solution like in Model 3/Y for the same aero advantages). In the Model X, the rear door design really does have unique usages, even though it is drastically more complicated than regular doors.

Again, other cars are not the issue. Many, many cars had serious design defects that cost lives in the 60s and 70s, but Ford got their asses sued off because of the Pinto mostly because it was an easy case to prove. Same here.

About 2-3 years into its production (1973) the Pinto already started having reports of fire in rear end crashes. By mid 1974, there was a lawsuit where 4 deaths and 3 serious injuries were tied to its design.
Ford Pinto - Wikipedia
Sure, if the prevalence of accidents where rear door exit played a huge factor reaches such a level for Teslas, there might be some probability of pressure on Tesla, but again, given there are far more cars with worse rear exit designs (designs that you can't easily exit even when car has power) and no evidence it is considered an issue that requires banning such designs, I find that probability extremely low. Especially given the specifics in Teslas narrows things such that it only plays a factor in accidents severe enough to disable the 12V system, but yet the rear doors are not damaged enough to still be able to open on their own, plus the rear passengers are conscious and able enough to exit on their own.

I feel so special that my death trap doors are not as bad as your death trap doors. How many Pintos did they sell before the law suits started rolling in? These days there are Federal agencies that tend to be the tip of the spear for this sort of thing. We'll see how they handle it. With the publicity of EV fires (deserved or not) difficult to open doors get attention very readily. This is not a closed matter.

They sold about 1.5-2 million Pintos before the lawsuits started rolling in (the recall in 1978 was also around that many vehicles). Tesla had passed the 2 million mark recently. But again the amount of cars with difficult or impossible to open rear doors greatly surpasses this number (again, I point to coupes, extended cab trucks, multiple Mazda vehicles, the i3, and the rest of the ones on the following list).
Autotrader - page unavailable
I just find it hard to believe if a ban have not been triggered for those cars, suddenly it would be for Tesla.

 

[gnuarm]

I'm talking about in normal use when you accidentally or purposefully activate the manual releases. The Model 3/Y pops down the window using the door ajar sensor (was changed in an update after people complained about damaging trim). That makes so you only risk doing so when the car has no power, in which case, damaging the trim is a small price to pay (as most likely it's an emergency).

I'm talking about using the manual release for what it is intended, emergency operation.

I'm not talking about training people, just making them aware that's likely the most viable exit method in many cases, instead of wasting time struggling to open the rear doors.

That's called training.

It's irrelevant if the inability of the door to open is because the door is jammed/deformed, the internal latch mechanism broke, the door handle broke, child locks are on, an electrical failure, or any other reason why you can't open the door, the glass break tool gives you an extra option to exit the vehicle, if that is a huge concern for you.

The glass brake tool has many limitations. It is very relevant to the person stuck behind the door. If the car is designed so as to not trap people, that eliminates an entire category of "why" they are stuck.

It's definitely the reason in the Model 3/Y however, as it uses a design where the trim/weather seal can be damaged if you don't let the window drop. Using an electronic release ensures that never happens, as it allows the car to always drop the window before the door is pushed open. Then there is a secondary manual release for the front doors for emergencies. This design is not unique to Tesla, and had been used before in other cars.

Not sure why you are talking about this.

I remember reading an article in the past that mentioned frameless designs that don't drop the windows (couldn't find it again in my search), and there were compromises made in those kinds of designs (don't remember if it was wind noise or weather sealing), which is why most frameless designs today slip the windows into the trim/seal (and drop the windows down slightly when opening). It's a balance of issues to consider in engineering. That's the point I'm trying to make. You aren't only considering one thing in a design: namely exiting the vehicle without power (which is something that rarely happens), you also have to consider the factors that affect daily use and may be far more significant for most users (like louder wind noise, worse weather sealing, or increased door opening resistance).

I have no doubt there are many trade offs in nearly every design decision made. If not, it's not really a decision, it's just design.. Some decisions have significant impact on safety.

Others already point out actually Tesla had gone through multiple revisions of the Model S door handle design. The latest part eliminates many components in the design and makes the part much simpler and less prone to failure.
Here's a great video that goes over the changes if you are interested in the engineering:

In the Model S case, that handle design was mostly gimmick (could have been replaced by a much simpler solution like in Model 3/Y for the same aero advantages). In the Model X, the rear door design really does have unique usages, even though it is drastically more complicated than regular doors.

About 2-3 years into its production (1973) the Pinto already started having reports of fire in rear end crashes. By mid 1974, there was a lawsuit where 4 deaths and 3 serious injuries were tied to its design.
Ford Pinto - Wikipedia
Sure, if the prevalence of accidents where rear door exit played a huge factor reaches such a level for Teslas, there might be some probability of pressure on Tesla, but again, given there are far more cars with worse rear exit designs (designs that you can't easily exit even when car has power) and no evidence it is considered an issue that requires banning such designs, I find that probability extremely low. Especially given the specifics in Teslas narrows things such that it only plays a factor in accidents severe enough to disable the 12V system, but yet the rear doors are not damaged enough to still be able to open on their own, plus the rear passengers are conscious and able enough to exit on their own.

You keep returning to comparing to other designs, but you aren't really qualified to make that comparison. Your analysis of the issue is flawed. The doors on Teslas are a point of concern enough that they provided alternate methods of opening the doors. Unfortunately they don't do a very good job of making people aware of this issue. I wonder if the guys in Texas might have gotten out of the car alive had the doors been easier to open in such an emergency? It's so easy to talk about the various options they had, but in that sort of accident you are not thinking clearly. It's no different from the apartment I saw the other day with the fire extinguisher right next to the stove which is the worse place to mount it in the kitchen. A fire extinguisher should be mounted by the exit so you are running away from the fire to reach it, not toward the fire which is what instinct will dictate. After a significant car crash you are barely thinking at all. Auto design needs to factor that as a primary safety issue.

They sold about 1.5-2 million Pintos before the lawsuits started rolling in (the recall in 1978 was also around that many vehicles). Tesla had passed the 2 million mark recently. But again the amount of cars with difficult or impossible to open rear doors greatly surpasses this number (again, I point to coupes, extended cab trucks, multiple Mazda vehicles, the i3, and the rest of the ones on the following list).
Autotrader - page unavailable
I just find it hard to believe if a ban have not been triggered for those cars, suddenly it would be for Tesla.

As I've said, you can't compare all cars without comparing the entire car and all factors. What is unsafe in one car may be much safer in others. I do know Tesla already has an image problem with battery fires which other EVs are not helping with. If people realized how difficult it is to open the doors when power is dead it would have a significant impact on sales even without a recall.

 

[wipster]

Already a lead story in the WSJ.
prayers for the families, facts needed before media starts running with this

And today, over a year later, this accident was one of the leading stories on Inside Edition, where they didn't mention a thing about the Doctor/driver's blood/alcohol measurement being over the limit, or that the door handle is working as intended.

The FUD is growing stronger Obi Wan, Tesla must be doing very well and/or they're running out of spectacular crashes, especially when there's a death.

 

[qdeathstar]

And today, over a year later, this accident was one of the leading stories on Inside Edition, where they didn't mention a thing about the Doctor/driver's blood/alcohol measurement being over the limit, or that the door handle is working as intended.

The FUD is growing stronger Obi Wan, Tesla must be doing very well and/or they're running out of spectacular crashes, especially when there's a death.

musk is pissing off the wrong hombres

 

[2101Guy]

And today, over a year later, this accident was one of the leading stories on Inside Edition, where they didn't mention a thing about the Doctor/driver's blood/alcohol measurement being over the limit, or that the door handle is working as intended.

The FUD is growing stronger Obi Wan, Tesla must be doing very well and/or they're running out of spectacular crashes, especially when there's a death.

? Inside Edition absolutely said he was drunk/over the legal limit. But that had nothing to do with the door handles not extending

 

[alangold]

So this 60 year old guy went to all that trouble and set the AP to high speed in the first couple blocks of leaving the house? Since the car is a P my guess is in showing off to a friend or friend not familiar with the car (if driving) car was being driven fast, lost control and people tried to get out. This all happened in a short time period not on a highway with time to "rig" the car and not sure how it would get to a high rate of speed to do that damage. Does not make sense for all the effort to rig it and on a residential street at these speeds.

In Florida a model s plaid - crashed into a house after running stop sign - should inexperienced drivers have a 1000 hp race car disguised as a luxury suv - I agree sound like human error in this crash

 

[gearchruncher]

should inexperienced drivers have a 1000 hp race car disguised as a luxury suv - I agree sound like human error in this crash

I can't figure out if you are saying Tesla shouldn't sell 1000HP cars to anyone that shows up or if they should but it's the driver's fault.

 

[wipster]

? Inside Edition absolutely said he was drunk/over the legal limit. But that had nothing to do with the door handles not extending

You're right, they did mention the drunk/over the limit, I just didn't remember... the mind is a terrible thing to waste, just like the waist is a terrible thing to mind... I think.