Pulling the Plug

From the flourish of flush-hidden door handles to deadly seatbelt quirks of the past, the story of the automobile is a chronicle of features that were killed despite their visible beauty. Thankfully, the regulators concluded a few times that safety should trump aesthetics or raw performance. The latest in the list of such auto-murders features China, which has outlawed an iconic modern design touch — hidden, pop-out door handles. With all passenger vehicles facing this ban from January 1, 2027, a flash-fire has ignited between form, function and passenger safety.

China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has banned flush handles as it prioritises automotive safety following accidents where electrical door systems failed after crashes, leaving occupants trapped inside. The passengers could not open the doors from inside, and there were no door handles on the outside for passers-by to yank on to save the occupants – incontrovertible proof that style should not endanger lives.

For a Hundred Years

It was the mid-20th century that saw cars become mainstream. As a fledgling industry oohed and aahed its way to sexy adornments on the new machines that moved fast, regulators and engineers began pushing back against design excesses that undermined safety.

One of the earliest and most visible examples were pop-up headlights. For years, these concealed headlamps defined the sleek silhouettes of iconic sports cars, from Corvettes to Mazda RX-7s. But changes in safety norms and pedestrian protection – protruding, hard-edged features increased risk in collisions – saw these head-turner lights disappear from volume production in early 2000.

Similarly, bull bars – the heavy, SUV-fashion add-ons that were coveted for rugged looks and perceived protection – were banned from new vehicles in the European Union after 2002 as they caused disproportionate harm to pedestrians in collisions. Such are the contrasts on which the history of automotive safety is built: features consumers loved for flair or perceived utility, but attributes that proved dangerous or incompatible with evolving crash standards.

Safety, Not Nostalgia

Not all discontinued features vanished by choice. Often, it took regulatory intervention to force change. Consider early automatic seatbelts, once a bridging technology before airbags became reliable and affordable. They were phased out because they could be cumbersome, inconsistent in effectiveness and eventually became redundant once three-point seatbelts and airbags became common. The evolution of seatbelt technology itself, from basic lap belts to three-point systems and pretensioners, reflects how safety research reshaped what was acceptable.

In the United States and other parts of the world, safety norms drove the adoption of electronic stability control and advanced driver-assistance systems as standard fare. Although such tech may be celebrated today, early resistance from automakers was muted till regulators mandated these systems in vehicles after 2010. Design elements that once enhanced aesthetics or performance, such as removable doors or windshields on early off-roaders or quirky convertible tops, faded because they just could not meet advancing rollover protection and crash test requirements.

Even parts of the cabin we take for granted now evolved from less safe predecessors. Cockpit features like vent windows, beloved for natural airflow, vanished once climate control systems became effective and safer in crash scenarios; manual choke cables disappeared with the rise of electronic fuel injection, which improved cold starts and reduced risks linked to engine stalling.

Dumbed-Down for Safety

On the performance side, design choices that merrily pushed vehicles toward thrilling capabilities had to be dialled back too. Such as mid-century push-button transmission selectors… while futuristic, these confused drivers and were prone to mechanical failure, especially in emergencies, leading to their being murdered. In earlier eras, convertibles without rollover protection were a standard, until crash data drove the adoption of reinforced structures and safety cages.

The very fact that such features were allowed in the first place speaks to how auto regulation has lagged behind innovation: attractiveness came first, safety later (after the ‘necessary’ injuries or deaths had occurred). Over time, consumer advocacy, crash research and public safety campaigns shifted the balance decisively toward safety outcomes. These are now standard, such as three-point seatbelts, child restraints and crash testing programs like Bharat NCAP and Euro NCAP.

Waving the Rulebook

Even as design flourishes evolve, safety rulebooks tighten. The European Council’s mid-2020s safety mandates brought advanced systems such as automatic emergency braking, lane-keeping assistance and driver drowsiness alerts into compulsory use. Remember, these auto flourishes were designed explicitly to prevent accidents, not mitigate their effects. In India, the mandatory rollout of airbags in all passenger cars from 2022 and the establishment of domestic crash test protocols underscores a similar trajectory toward prioritising occupant protection.

It is worth noting that some banned or phased-out elements were not just about aesthetics but about deeper hazard reduction. Catalytic converters were made mandatory in the United States from the 1970s onward to curb toxic emissions, and laws now strictly prohibit tampering with or removing these devices because of the broader public health benefits.

Door-Handle Precedent

The Chinese move against flush or hidden door handles arguably marks an inflection point for modern design trends, especially in electric vehicles. These sleek, flush-mounted handles have come to symbolise the EV era’s high-tech aesthetics and efficiency focus. Yet, regulators found that where electrical systems fail, in crashes or battery outages, reliant door systems often trap occupants or delay rescue. The new norms mandate clearly visible, mechanically operable handles with manual release, underscoring that style can’t override access and egress in emergencies.

This repositioning is particularly gripping because it shows that regulators are willing to reshape core elements of brand identity and vehicle character in favour of real-world safety outcomes. The debate is not aesthetic but rooted in a growing body of incidents where natural forces (crashes, fires, power loss) strip away the assumptions designers casually make about technology reliability. Safety, in these circumstances, can mean the difference between life and death.

Need to Think Safety

India too stands at a crossroads where automotive innovation and regulatory responsibility must co-evolve. If the overarching lesson of the last century is that safety standards save lives – from banning dangerous features to mandating life-saving tech – the sensible next move has to be the integration of safety thinking through the design process, not as an afterthought.

Regulations such as Bharat NCAP’s crash ratings and mandatory airbags show progress; the next steps should include clear norms and testing procedures for emerging EV-specific systems, escape accessibility standards and context-sensitive design evaluation.

Automakers and regulators need to remember that safety is not the enemy of progress; it can even be its foundation. As the flush-handle ban shows, sometimes the most radical innovation is simply putting human beings first, thus ensuring that the vehicle’s elegance never compromises the occupants’ chance to walk away. And lest we forget, let’s also laud China for having the balls and bearings to announce the ban.