At this moment in automotive history, there seems to be a lot of interest in affordable trucks. This is a good thing! Cars are too damn expensive as it is, and trucks are wonderfully useful machines. There are three potential new affordable pickup trucks on the horizon that seem to have captured the attention of the car-interested public: Ford’s upcoming allegedly-affordable electric pickup, Slate’s $26,400 electric pickup, and the lone combustion-powered member of this triumvirate, the proposed REO Runabout pickup truck.
Of all of these, I think it’s safe to say that the biggest wildcard is REO. Ford is, well, Ford; Slate has Amazon money behind it; but REO? Who are they? Why do they think they can compete in this notoriously difficult business of making cars? Are they for real? Is this some scam? As car enthusiasts, we have been burned many times before, after all.
So what’s going on? Well, you may recall that a few weeks ago I interviewed real estate broker Zach De Bernardi, the man behind REO. The interview was very interesting, and I came away thinking that De Bernardi has an absolute metric crapton of work ahead of him, towering obstacles, and odds of success that wouldn’t make me want to stake my mortgage on the outcome. But I also believed he was sincere in his goals. And I think the goals are very good ones, and I think the trucks and associated company he’s planning incorporate some genuinely good ideas.
So that’s why I thought it’d be good to have him on our podcast, which you can listen to right here:
Or, if you’re into using your eyes and ears, here’s a YT link so you can watch our eyes, to see if we’re lying:
Or to listen to more podcast episodes, you can go to Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or you can use the RSS feed and point your favorite Podcast player at it.
It’s one thing to read what someone is planning and another thing to actually see them talk about those plans, and for something that is as dependent on trust in the person running the show, I thought an actual, recorded interview with De Bernardi would make the most sense.
Everyone is skeptical. We all remember companies like Elio and that EV truck maker Nikolai or Lordstown Motors, all of which had big ideas and lots of promises and hopes and are now just ashes. Companies like Elio took millions of dollars in deposits and produced nothing. It’s understandable that people’s initial reactions are skeptical.
I’m skeptical myself! And yet, I still manage to feel a bit of hope when I talked to De Bernardi. The goals of the company seem to make sense – build affordable, combustion-powered trucks that are free of so much of the technological frippery of our time, and are designed for people who appreciate the utility and charms of a well-designed, straightforward machine.
I love all of that! I tried to ask De Bernardi the hard questions, to feel out the company’s plans, and I found his answers to be quite honest and reasonable. They’re not going to fall for vain boondoggles like trying to design their own engines or anything like that. They’ll rely heavily on trusted, established suppliers and try to leverage existing standards. They’re open to future tech advancements, like automated driving systems and EV powertrains, but the plan is to keep their trucks modular and upgradable, so those things can be optional.
REO is still very much at the beginning of this process, but they’re making steps. They’re working with outside firms to help engineer and design the truck, which makes sense, but I’m really eager to see some kind of prototype before I form real opinions.
Even if you read the previous interview, I’d encourage you to watch or listen to this podcast. I think it’ll give you a good sense of who is actually behind this company, which will help you to decide how you feel about them, which is important because to succeed, REO needs people to make (refundable, $25) reservations. A lot of reservations will make the company seem “real” to suppliers and investors. And having those will in turn make the company far more likely to succeed. But for that to happen, a lot of people will need to take a leap of faith. These reservations are a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem.
Oh, also, De Bernardi sort of challenged our readers to figure out the engine being sourced for the REO Runabout T4X. It’s an inline-four turbo, somewhere around 2 to 2.5 liters, power between 260 and 325 hp. What could that be?
Anyway, I can’t think of a better way to form an opinion about a potential new truck-making startup than listening to their CEO talk about their plans for an hour. Have at it!
The biggest red flag to me is that he has no experience in the auto industry, or manufacturing, or anyone on board who seems to have that experience.
As far as I can tell , this company is just this guy in his home office.
At least he knows how to keep overhead low.
You haven’t seen the desk.
https://static0.srcdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Better-Scarface-Has-Become-A-Parody-Scarface.jpg?q=50&fit=crop&w=825&dpr=1.5
“REO will never make a political post” but he finds time to bitch about Ralph Nader and Dylan Mulvaney. Sounds like a predictably specific sort of “not political.”
So yeah, fuck this dude.
REO is, of course, Ransom E. Olds.
Could this be the rebirth of Oldsmobile?
And will their second vehicle be called the REO Speedwagon?
*inserts LA Noire press X for doubt gif*
Vapor
That was a good interview, Jason. Good luck to that guy. I appreciate the candor in the interview, but wow do they have a long way to go!
This just makes me think of what I could do with 20k and a supplier of parts like LKQ. It wouldn’t be the same as a new vehicle but I have seen some impressive cheap builds before.
Do we have a competitive car building show where they build cars on a logical budget? That I would be interested to see.
Can’t hear/watch right now, but I’m curious how much “frills” actually contribute to the end price. I mean, we instinctively equate the bare bones beasts from our last with sensible spending, and the ostentatious fridges of today with inflated costs, but really, would a bare bones car today still be cheaper to produce?
AFAIK, the whole strategy from manufacturers is to convince us that accessories and extras should justify the higher price, but we know this is just going to their margins. Isn’t it true that a pedestrian hatch costs almost the same to engineer and produce (and support) as a loaded up SUV in most cases? This should be evidence enough that this business model, as proposed by this guy, isn’t really more than (at best) wishful thinking, and at worst, another rug pull waiting to happen.
I don’t want to be cynic, but I believe fixed costs, overhead and mandatory platform costs (certification, emissions, safety equipment) had already created a floor price for cars, be it two seater city cars or yank tanks (actually the latter should have a LOWER ceiling due to dereg). China is still pushing prices down because they have scale, are at peak industrialization, can afford lower margins, and have state backing. A start-up in a western country, without some tech bro infinite pockets? I doubt it very much. Would love to be proved wrong, though.
Do you mean “price”, or “cost”? Features and tech in cars are like restaurant sodas: cheap and high margin.
A while back (last year?) I did the math on the CUV upcharge by comparing the Corolla and the Corolla Cross. They have exactly the same powertrain and features, but the Cross weighs a few hundred pounds more. I was also able to find estimates for how much cost of materials is for automakers, and what I found was that Toyota’s Corolla Cross upcharge is several times more than the increased COM.
My bad, I meant cost. I still think in Portuguese (and I would ALSO be wrong in Portuguese, mind you)
You are correct on there being a price floor. The frills are not cheap to integrate, as every component adds to the total vehicle content. Each part requires engineering time, sourcing, logistics, storage, a spot in the plant to install it, a tool to fasten it to the vehicle, a person to use that tool, etc.
All the frills are still added 1. because they increase total sales, 2 people are still willing to
financepay for them, and 3 because they can bump the pricetag up more than enough to cover the costs.I’m the perfect customer for this. I’m sure many others here are as well. However the perpetual used car buyer also tends to avoid unknown/unproven vehicles, refuses to eat the depreciation for buying a new vehicle, and doesn’t want the Federally mandated tech that is in every new vehicle. These are huge hurdles to overcome for anyone chasing this market.
I don’t believe Chinese cars or any other have a benefit going here. The people that religiously buy 10 year old Toyotas will likely keep buying 10 year old Toyotas.
It would appear we have now seen more articles here about REO, a company without an actual design, than we have about Telo, a company with a couple prototypes and a contract for their body in white production.
This guy is a salesman and a bullshitter, but that doesn’t build vehicles, even if it might sell them.
I’m shocked that it is getting as much coverage here as it is, especially when it seems like they’re just going “We’re gonna make a Slate but gas and cheaper and we’ll get a render up soon.”
At least Telo and Slate had actual physical prototype vehicles when their announcements dropped. REO is giving us an outline.
Yeah, it really seems like Jason just likes talking to and about this guy. I guess the gas startup scene is essentially nonexistent, so this does draw attention that way, but a whole bunch of bluster and promises before you even have a design, much less a working prototype, feels like a way to part fools from their money.
It’s worse than Donut! At least they were claiming to have something you could imagine existing, where people aren’t aware of what to expect from a prototype and production facility, instead of just saying “we are going to imagine an entire automobile of some sort, eventually”.
It’s a concept of a plan for an agreement. Get with the times! /s
I listened to it… not super impressed by the whole ‘we’ll outsource engineering to a third party’ idea… A more cynical man than I might suggest this is a cash grab from the ‘Slate-but-y-EV-tho?’ crowd. He’s raised $375k from $25 donations… all off an AI render and a wishlist.
now finessing a way to keep a portion of it without being charged with a crime is the balancing act he has to pull off – which will be an extremely difficult act to pull off – you are starting to talk about enough money that its worth investigating, and I am basically positive this guy has spent zero time on a concept called “risk management”
This guy is an empty vessel for shit.
He doesn’t even have the resources to be full of shit.
He can be as serious as he wants, doesn’t mean he’ll actually do what he intends to.
Oh, I have reservations, alright. Still, hope REO succeeds. Me, I’m saving up for a Telo.
Are those reservations refundable?
I don’t know, but Telo and Slate ones are.
Good luck on an near impossible task with no money. It’s hard to fund raise for these things. Even tech focused bev is hard now. With ICE I don’t know how they will find any investors. Plus all the money is in ai now.
It sort of reminds me of the cleveland cycle werks guy. He came back from Germany in the great recession and tried to get a doe grant to build 125cc bikes using 40 to 50 year old tech. Honda clone engines from China no less.
The elios guy was very sure he was going to do it too. Even some fiance people bought in because of the what if. Refundable turns to non refundable when the company goes bankrupt. If there were some kind of loop holes. Like the lsv and kit cars get though then maybe.
But the cheapest Chinese utv is about $10k now. To have an actual truck at $21.5 with little volume starting from scratch seems almost impossible. Maybe they partner with some fitech to finance people on an incomplete vehicle that you have to finish get inspected and titled. Maybe build the thing like a utv or golf cart. Get the Munro book out and follow it along with lots of Chinese stuff just maybe.
I’ll put it in the same column as the mutiny guy with his open source imv concept knockoff. If it happens great but I’ll believe it when I see it.
Engine sounds like just about every modern engine. I would think it would be a ford or GM. But maybe it’s a Toyota. Would be funny if it was a Hyundai or VW.
Look I don’t think it’ll work but I’ve blown $25 on plenty of stupid stuff so they’ve got a reservation from me.
It’s real because the guy trying to make one says it’s real. That’s all the proof I need. (At least Slate has real trucks driving-ish around already.)
I take it that you have a deposit in for an Aptera, eh?
I don’t but know guys who do. Not much harm in spending a little cash to hope/help for something that appeals.
Also, I’m much more patient that I was in my youth. 🙂
That’s deeply unfair to Aptera, and I say that having agreed to someone’s comparison, “Aptera is the Star Citizen of cars”.
REO is more like a failing Kickstarter campaign by one guy who knows nothing about video games and says “it’ll be a game about space probably”.
So… uhhh… you have a deposit in on an Aptera as well?
LOL
No, I’d barely heard of them before Slate comparisons, I don’t like carbon fiber or three-wheelers, and I don’t have money for deposits anyhow.
Aptera just has more of a point than REO, which is just a Slate ripoff with less legitimacy than Donut.
Not a chance.
Mr. Betteridge strikes again!
Honestly, I think if I was going to design a new vehicle from ground up, I would go EV.
Remember Mahindra? I was excited about Mahindra. This truck was what I needed and nothing I did not, the manufacturer has an excellent reputation, the truck was already being built and working well (admittedly the older generation), the powertrain was reliable and robust.
And…. it turned into vaporware because Mahindra couldn’t get their diesel to pass US emissions standards.
Meanwhile, with all the challenges that Slate will have to get their little truck on the road and to the public in the next year, passing emissions per EPA requirements is NOT one of them.
Building cars is hard. Designing them to pass the giant pack of requirements is even harder. Why not skip one?
I think that’s the reality. On top of it bev is likely to get cheaper and ICE is only likey to get more expensive.
My cousin has roxor he got cheap in one state where it was near impossible to register on the road. Then took it to a state who’s belief is if you want to give them money to register something then it should be registered. I really thought about buying one. Especially as they were selling for about $13k new at one point. Regulations make everything hard and expensive so bypass as many as you can.
The list of failed startups is getting rather long. It could be expected that potential private investors would shy away for that reason.
In China, the government makes sure that all automotive startups succeed, at least get off the ground before getting squeezed out of the market by the newer startups.
If a certain anti-EV president gets word of REO, he might act like a Chinese autocrat and put the full faith and credit of the Federal Government behind bringing back a historic American automotive name.
Personally, I think this guy has a tough uphill battle, but rooting for the underdog is part of the national psyche.
“the proposed REO Runabout pickup truck. Of all of these, I think it’s safe to say that the biggest wildcard is REO.”
As I said before, I’ll believe this REO truck is real when I see it dancing on the sand
Just like that river twisting through a dusty land
And if it shines, Zach will have to show me all he can
Oh REO, REO, will you cost twenty one Grande?
Hat tip to Cheap Bastard for that last line.
You can tune a piano, but you can’t tuna fish.
Reading another interview REO is planning on outdoing Slate on bare bone and removing the interior door cards. I wonder what focus group said that is what they were looking for in a truck?
The one that snorts cocaine?
The Venn diagram of people who don’t want door cards in their truck, and people who buy new trucks, are two separate circles.
They must have gotten a few from the comment section in it. “Door cards are just another point of failure!”
Uhhhh, that sounds like something made by pretty much every major manufacturer.
Ford, GM, Honda, Stellantis, Mercedes, BMW, Toyota, Mazda, VW, Hyundai/Kia, Nissan all make something that fits that description. And that is just for Federalized engines, there is probably way more if they want to look at overseas stuff and try to federalize it. I’m struggling to think who doesn’t make an engine that covers that besides the likes of Subaru, Ferrari, Aston, other small/niche manufacturers, and EV only companies.
From another interview: “There’s a lot of Toyota DNA from vehicles I love that’s going to be put into this vehicle,”
I might have misheard, but I thought he mentioned something certified for manual or automatic, which basically narrows it down to Toyota’s 2.4 or Ford’s 2.3 (at least using MY26 light trucks), which I’d lean towards the Toyota.
GMs 2.0T was offered with stick in the Camaro too.
You just put more thought into this than the CEO has.
Awaiting the ever present “just buy a used truck” comments.
But it’s not wrong?
It just gets old. If we only let the rich buy $100K pickups and EVERYONE else buys used then the used prices shoot up. By the time they are cheap enough for poor people to buy them they are trashed and unreliable. There are people who would be ok with basic $20K new than rusty mess broken fancy used $20K they cannot rely on to get to work. There is this assumption that if people do not have the time/space/tools/skills to repair every bit of their cars they do not deserve to have a car.
All fair/good points, but this is what these problems will get ya
I guess it is good then that there are compact, midsize, and full size trucks for sale $30K to $40K then. Nobody has to pay $100K for a truck.
That said, a truck is a poor form of personal transport for someone that is poor and doesn’t want to remain poor.
Many trades people use their truck. also substitute any other type of vehicle, and if the only buy used people get their way those cheaper alternatives will keep getting sparse.
And yet the cheapest vehicle sold in the USA in 2025 costs less than the cheapest vehicle sold in 1995. Cheap cars are not disappearing. They just get better: safer, cleaner, more fuel efficient, larger, more powerful, more features.
Sorry but you can’t guilt me into wasting money on a new car so that someone else can drive it 15 years from now.
I am not trying to, I would just like people to not constantly belittle and harass people who buy new.
Who belittles people that buy new cars? Sorry but that really isn’t a thing unless you are talking about people buying new cars they can’t afford on crazy loan terms
I don’t, that’s where used cars come from after all, especially since used cars from elsewhere are forbidden until they are 25 years old. When I was a kid, buying any car from anywhere in the world was just a matter of money, and if a car wasn’t too old someone would repair it.
For all the ranting about globalization, buying actual stuff, for example cars and cameras is far more country specific now than in the 1960s.
So, now Americans with more money to spend on new cars than I would spend on transportation are where cars come from.
The fact that lots of them lease or trade in cars before the warranty expires and think that features and complexity are a good thing is a problem.
And why they persist in only buying cars various shades of gray, black white or red. Except my wife. She got a new Subaru in “Plasma” sort of bike green.
RED CED? Oh, never mind. The other day I left a $20 tip for a server. $25? Why not?
CEO: Do you know what that is?
I know what that is…That’s an espresso machine. No, no, wait. It’s a snow cone maker. Is it a water heater?
Serious reply, Mazda (Skyactiv-G 2.5T)
I’m pretty sure it’ll just be a pencil.
Did you ask who is going to front the roughly billion dollars that is needed to start up a car company to make a $21,500 truck?
Yeah, that’s a little bit of a hurdle.
But if 40 million people each make a $25 deposit, boom!
Math!
1. Create a concept of a plan.
2. Tell everyone it will be great. Loudly.
3. Dismiss naysayers as ‘fake news’ and ‘derangement syndrome’ sufferers.
4. Take deposits.
4. Profit!
4.5 Talk about about delivering the product
4.6 Talk more about delivering the product
5 *fart^
5.1 Take the money and run.
{hand waving] Minor details, and it’s “OPM”.
Though if any vehicle can be made and sold for that price with a tiny profit (eventually, someday, maybe), a basic dumb little ICE-powered body-on-frame single-cab pickup certainly should be it. Though I question why the hell you would want to put a turbo motor in such a thing. Surely somebody makes a 125-150hp n/a inline four as complex as a hammer that would do the job perfectly adequately. Or just make it unibody and FWD, possibly even cheaper to build, with lots more choices of drivetrain. I am assuming it’s BoF from that shadow picture where you can see a split betwixt cab and bed. I do love that they are planning on drop sides – how every pickup should be.
Problem is, there’s a good reason nobody makes those anymore for the US, and I predict Slate will sell to the handful of people (and businesses) that want such a thing then die or get bought out. Though that said, the Luddites who like this sort of thing would probably find this rather more appealing than an EV.
The turbo is so they can get 260 – 325 hp. Which seems like a lot for something sold they advertise as a “Ameri-Kei” class truck.
Kind of my point – why? Then you are also spending money on more suspension and especially more brakes and tires. And more suspension and tires to handle the speed means it’s definitely going to be less good at doing real truck things.
People need to slow the fuck down. My 230hp BMWs are more than fast enough to get your license incinerated – why the hell does a dumb little pickup need more power than that? Not like it’s going to be rated to tow 15klbs or something. Without a PHEV battery, even with modern safety requirements a small single cab shorter bed truck should not weigh more than 3klbs, and hopefully a good bit less than that if it’s as stripped out as they are saying. A single-cab RWD Frontier is 2900, as one example…
You need to promise 325 hp for $21,500 to get those sweet, sweet deposits from people that want to believe a startup can build a truck cheaper than Toyota because …. some …. conspiracy.
You then live it up for a few years, make a prototype or two, and then when the money stop coming in declare bankruptcy and move on to the next scam.
How many times do we need to see the same series of steps play before people learn?
Given this sort of thing has probably been going on since currency was invented, an infinite number of times.
In theory you probably could make a smaller, simpler truck and sell it for rather less than a Tacoma (which is pretty big and bloated these days, and I am sure makes LOTS of profit for Toyota). But this much cheaper? Seems unlikely, given the need to support the overhead of the entire company with it.
A company like Toyota could make a smaller, simpler truck and sell it for less than a Tacoma – they do it today with the Hilux Champ.
A start-up with no economy of scale doing the same is a pipe dream.
Like I said in another post, the economy of scale is buying in the major bits rather than DIY’ing them. Not that I really disagree with you.
Toyota doesn’t do it because there is no real market for anything smaller and crappier than a Tacoma in the US, of course. And they already sell every Tacoma they bother to make.
Yes, we are in agreement on both of those statements.
How to make a cheap ICE pickup:
1) Import CKD kits from Toyota
2) Bolt them together
3) Pry off the T logos and glue on REO logos
4) Market them as “Proudly Assembled in the USA”, with lots of pictures of flags and eagles.
The problem would be:
When I first saw the Slate my first though was that it would be a Chinese CKD. That is pretty much the only way to make money at the promised price point.
If you do not have adequate horsepower available then how in the hell are we supposed to eventually get the performance variant, obviously called the Speedwagon?
If this company succeeds and does not produce this, what are we even doing anymore?
The originals had 60-70hp for a much larger truck, so I should think that 150hp would be entirely adequate.
I don’t think you’re old enough to get the joke. That’s ok, happens to me all the time.
I’m 57 – how old is this joke? There is the truck, and there is the band…
The truck maker in question has secured the rights to the “Speedwagon” name, IIRC.
I assume they also had to secure the rights to use “REO” as well (Volvo Group owned that), so it’s an absolute no-brainer to get and use Speedwagon as well as part of the deal.
But my point was that the original truck of that name was not exactly a rocketship (albeit a bit faster than the norm for the day), and this one needn’t be either.
Haha you just can’t quit “luddites”
Do we really think the split betwixt (yay! Got to use ‘betwixt’!) the bed and cab is anything other than “cuz that was in the truck pictures I saw’?
BoF is cheaper to engineer than unibody, especially for a vehicle that presumably will be intended to have decent cargo and towing capability, so I am hazarding a guess based on the picture that is how they will go.
Actually the cost is likely over 2 Billion these days. That’s about what it cost Tesla to bring the Model S to market. And the Model 3 cost more.
Tesla did a lot of expensive stupid shit with the Model 3 that would not be necessary on a dumb little BoF truck (“gigacastings”, “full self driving” glass roof, electric door poppers, giant screen, connectivity, on and on). Especially one with a bought in engine and transmission – and probably everything else mechanical – why re-invent the wheel?. The heavy lifting is done, so I bet these guys could get this built for a $500M or so. I just doubt that there is enough market for it, in the US anyway. And the rest of the world has lots of competition in the super basic truck space already. From Tuk-tuk to Hilux.
I expect this, if it ever actually exists, to be a lot like an old IH Scout. IH made the chassis, body, and rudimentary interior bits, but everything else was a mix of bits from other automakers and standard parts suppliers shared with other brands. instant economy of scale when you just buy, for example, a Dana 30 axle instead of engineering and producing your own bespoke one.
No, he’s right. My number was low. The last refresh I was part of was $600 million and that was just a new front clip, taillights in the back, and a new dash / center console for the interior.
Echoing this. By way of comparison, Slate raised $111m in Series A funds back in 2023, was up to $700m after Series B in 2024 (source), and added another $650m in Series C funding last year (source), so they’re in the neighborhood of $1.4bn raised in total funding.
Aside, I think it’s slightly interesting how we’re talking about Ford, Slate, and REO, while ignoring Telo. My gut instinct is that if you’re ranking by plausibility at this point, you have Ford (Ford) and Slate (decently well funded, seem serious about production) close up front, followed by Telo (trails in funding but continues to talk about moving towards production), followed lastly by REO (which has an idea, but seems yet to have much else to show).
One other reason I’d be interested in seeing funding is less about the numbers themselves, and more about what it takes to get there. It’s one thing to come up with a plausible-sounding idea and get some folks to give you $25 on the promise of it being refundable. It’s another thing to get hundreds of millions of dollars from an institution – at least making enough of a business case to show that the rewards are plausible enough to justify the risks. That doesn’t mean that those big institutional investors are necessarily going to be correct – but I’d certainly hope that they have people doing a modicum of financial due-diligence.
The Telo guy is too busy trying to bring a physical product to market for afternoon meth chats.
Should also be noted that Slate is obsessively low-capital and frugal, and not just in the “they have plastic body panels!” talking points. They got a lot of manufacturing consulting and expertise upfront, and used a lot of opportunities like used assembly line equipment from another factory that was closing. If you know the details, they’ve overcome a lot of challenges and used a lot of opportunities.
I’m told that some of it, like the CEO’s office being full of used furniture, is “Amazon DNA”, though I’ll continue to make the point that it isn’t an Amazon/Bezos truck (they have other backers, and Amazon is quite explicitly a tech/cloud company…Re:Build is about physical products).
Nobody is going to match their capital efficiency with a vehicle that’s more complex and conventional, especially without preparation and expertise this random rich guy doesn’t have.
“Being rich doesn’t make you good at cars” is one of the most common lessons from automotive startup history.
One of the things which has impressed me about Slate actually is the extent to which, having identified their concept, they’re making sober engineering decisions towards advancing it (from what I’ve read/heard). Stuff like the De Dion rear axle noted early on, the various reusable components, or reflecting on how a larger motor would’ve required other drivetrain components to be sized up (from The Autopian’s recent video). While I hadn’t heard some of that about their office, it certainly comports with that sort of attitude.