Raymond Love

Just a regular guy. A recent fan of REO Trucks, And on a mission to get back our freedoms that are slowly being whittled away sometimes nearly silently.

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

@it4mu @reoindustries Don’t claim to be an innovator myself, but I suspect buying from one keeps the dream alive.

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

The case for a vehicles right to repair. Why I am strongly supporting @reoindustries

What is REO doing about federal spyware, telematics, and manufacturer control measures?

From REO Industries’ own public statements, the stated approach is to keep the Runabout as free of manufacturer data collection and software lock-in as federal standards allow.
Official materials and posts describe the base truck as shipping with no telematics, no spyware, and no connected features. The only cabin screen is a small display for diagnostics and Apple CarPlay. Controls are physical switches and levers. They have said Bluetooth will be optional and that there will be no telematics.

On repair and parts, REO has committed in writing to no parts-pairing — nothing is software-locked to the VIN — so compatible replacement parts (OEM or otherwise) are intended to work without manufacturer authorization. The vehicle is described as open in the sense that it does not check where a part came from. Diagnostics are meant to read in plain English on a basic scanner. Body panels and trim are designed to come off with common tools. There are no subscriptions or feature locks. A public parts catalog with fair prices and multi-year backing is planned, along with an authorized maker marketplace.

Any future autonomy capability is framed as an optional aftermarket add-on (modular roof mounts and retrofit kits), not something required on the core truck.
In September 2026 REO also wrote to House leadership asking to restore three specific right-to-repair protections that had been dropped from H.R. 7389: no impairing owner or independent-shop access to diagnostic and repair tools/information, no using parts-pairing or software locks to block non-OEM parts, and an FTC complaint process with a deadline. Their stated position is that these protections matter for ordinary owners and independent shops.

These are company-stated targets and design directions drawn from the site (including the “The Case for a Simple Truck” letter), the REPAIR Act letter, and official posts. Final vehicle content will depend on engineering, certification, and any applicable regulations. Specs, features, and policies remain subject to change. A reservation does not guarantee a vehicle.

Follow @reoindustries or reserve at https://t.co/ESKBHfRp7x if you want to track the project.
Grok-generated summary for REO Truck fans and intended buyers. Independent compilation — not commissioned by or affiliated with REO Industries, Inc.

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

@it4mu @reoindustries This is my take of what REO Trucks is all about. If this is how it produces that product and builds this, I expect a lot more to come.

Then I think it also opens the doors again for more dreamers and innovation that I think we haven’t seen in years!

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

Not doing a blind buy, but if it meets, is usable and lives up to my expectations, such as suitable then it will take some hard reasons not to move forward. Now if this turns into a pretty shell of a truck that I have to drop an engine in to complete, in, would be the likely end of my motivation.

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

Absolutely agree. Whoever builds the best network to keep this open and connects parts suppliers with customers who can fix their own vehicles will come out ahead. Independent shops that get low-cost or free access to the tools they need—without having to pay for constant subscription updates—will be rewarded.

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

This means that new automobile manufacturers are worth considering, innovation has been locked into manufacturers owning the products so tightly that less options for freedom of choice.

@reoindustries
@slateauto

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

Here is the thing. We might buy a vehicle and keep it completely stock.

Some people want to preserve what it is. Others want to change it to match what they need or what interests them.

That was one of the real pleasures of older cars and trucks—they were simple enough that both approaches were possible.

It was also how a lot of automotive ideas got started. People tried things no one else had thought of yet.

You could leave it original or make it yours. Neither choice required fighting the vehicle or the manufacturer.

That’s the kind of freedom that actually lasts.

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

@2_easily_amused @reoindustries @Zachdebo Not everyone wants that green, but honestly as shared it is a color that stands out. Glad that they shared that in their first appearance reveal

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

The more I think about REO, the more impressed I am that the truck itself isn’t really the end goal.

Right-to-repair is just the beginning of true ownership. The real idea is an affordable, dependable truck that’s simple enough to maintain, modify, and make your own. Simplicity isn’t a compromise—it’s the foundation that makes everything else possible.

Other startups helped spark this concept, but I believe REO is taking it further by embracing a conventional, customizable platform without unnecessary complexity or restrictions.

That’s a big reason I believe REO has a real chance to succeed.

For some, it’s simply an affordable, dependable truck that does what they need. For others, it’s the starting point for building the truck they’ve always wanted. The possibilities are nearly endless.

It’s not just a truck. It’s the starting point for the vehicle you actually want.

And perhaps that’s what excites me most. REO has the opportunity to build more than vehicles. It can build a community of owners who take pride in what they own, make it their own, and support the company for years to come.

To me, that’s what makes REO different. It’s a genuine “dare to dream” platform.

@reoindustries

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

Right to Repair, this was an AI response to trying understand what drives the limitations of Right to Repair…

Question: Is Right to Repair being limited because of safety concerns, protection of proprietary designs, and government interest in telematics and the ability to remotely disable vehicles?

Answer: Yes, these are among the main arguments used to justify limiting Right to Repair.

Manufacturers argue that unrestricted access to modern vehicle software and electronics could create safety risks, expose proprietary technology, or allow unauthorized vehicle control.

Telematics is a major part of the debate. Manufacturers control access to diagnostic data, vehicle functions, and certain remote capabilities, including disabling vehicles for theft prevention. Government agencies also have legitimate safety and security interests, although this does not establish a general government right to remotely disable vehicles.

Right to Repair advocates argue that many of these concerns are exaggerated or could be addressed through secure access. They believe restrictions also protect manufacturer control over repairs, parts, data, and service revenue.

Bottom line: Safety and security concerns are legitimate, but they can also be used to justify restrictions that reduce competition, increase repair costs, and limit vehicle owners’ control over their own property.

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

@NCGOP What is the stance on Right to Repair in regards to Vehicles, Farm Equipment.

And is this a Federal or Local issue in your view?

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

@RoyCooperNC What is your stance on Right to Repair in regards to Vehicles, Farm Equipment.

And is this a Federal or Local issue in your view?

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

@WhatleyNC What is your stance on Right to Repair in regards to Vehicles, Farm Equipment.

And is this a Federal or Local issue in your view?

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

Here are the names where the record actually supports it — NC first.

**North Carolina — the clearest call-out is State Sen. Brent Jackson**
Jackson was the primary sponsor of the 2022 Farm Act (SB 762), which started with a farm right-to-repair section. In committee he replaced that section with a study after dealer and manufacturer opposition, saying: “At the end of the day, we might change something or we might do nothing.” That is documented in [WRAL](https://t.co/1Y5iqAKWSd) and [News & Observer coverage](https://t.co/hl0a1OTEoP), and the final study-only law is [SL 2022-55](https://t.co/tZazsNXkgN).
The Senate Agriculture, Energy, and Environment Committee adopted the removal by voice vote, so there is no roll call to blame other members individually — Jackson is the documented driver. **Gov. Roy Cooper** signed the weakened bill on July 8, 2022. Fair to say he signed it; the record does not show he authored the removal. The 43 senators and 99 House members who voted yes voted for the whole Farm Act after repair was already out, so I won't call them out for the removal itself.
Later NC: HB 938 (2025, electronics repair) was filed and sent to House Rules with no further action. No named holder is documented.

**Federal — Rep. Brett Guthrie**
Guthrie (R-KY), chair of House Energy and Commerce and sponsor of H.R.7389, offered the substitute whose Section 202 codifies the old industry agreements instead of the REPAIR Act's telematics access, and sends telematics to a study due by 2030. That is his bill, his amendment, his committee — [https://t.co/s8idXd2sKD record](https://t.co/Oxym0Wd8JO).
The REPAIR Act and FARM Act sit stalled in Guthrie's House committee and Sen. Ted Cruz's Senate Commerce Committee with no hearing. That's chair-jurisdiction inaction, not a documented personal hold, and I'll label it that way.
Two people **not** to call out: Rep. Jake Auchincloss was the lone “no” vote on H.R.7389 because it didn't protect Massachusetts' stronger law — a pro-repair objection. Rep. Neal Dunn, the REPAIR Act sponsor, protested the narrowing publicly. And on the military repair provisions stripped from the defense bill, no individual remover is named in the official record; reporting points to conference leaders, so I'd label that an allegation, not a record.

**Other states**
Maine: Sen. Chip Curry sponsored and Gov. Janet Mills signed the 2026 law delaying telematics compliance to Sept. 1, 2027 — recorded. But Mills also vetoed a separate bill she said would let manufacturers control access, so she's mixed, not simply anti-repair. Oklahoma: a farm group alleged “House leadership” held the bill under manufacturer pressure, but named no person — I won't name the Speaker on an allegation.

Your trackers now have this Accountability rule built in. Want this NC/federal call-out list made into a clean Facebook/X post file like the others?

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

Right to Repair research with Grok Bot!

States Discouraging Right to Repair - Subtle Hinders

Most states that pass a right to repair law quietly leave out the vehicles and farm equipment people actually need to fix. Minnesota, Washington, New York, California and Oregon passed electronics repair laws that exclude motor vehicles and farm or off-road equipment. Colorado covers farm equipment but exempts vehicles. So a state can claim a repair win while drivers and farmers get nothing.

North Carolina did it in 2022. The NC Farm Act started with a farm right to repair section. That section was removed and replaced with a study. Gov. Cooper signed the final bill, and no repair duty followed.

Maine shows the delay tactic. Voters approved telematics access in 2023, but compliance was pushed to September 1, 2027. Massachusetts passed its law in 2020 and is still waiting on a federal court decision, so compliance stays uncertain.

Other bills die quietly with no vote to oppose in public. Oklahoma's farm bill passed committees then was held by House leadership with no floor vote. Virginia continued its farm bill to 2027. Iowa's farm bill passed the House 70 to 18, then stalled in the Senate. Montana, Wisconsin and Minnesota farm bills died in committee.

At the national level, the limits are built in. The 2014 auto industry agreement excludes telematics except in narrow cases, and more diagnosis is going wireless every year. The federal exemption that allows bypassing software locks on tractors and vehicles expires in October 2027 and must be defended again. Key and immobilizer access runs through an OEM-authorized registry. Where laws do pass, enforcement is often attorney general only, with little public action.

No state in 2025 or 2026 passed an outright new ban on independent repair. The discouragement works by carve-out, delay and inaction, which is exactly why it is hard to see.

#RightToRepair #REOIndustries #REOTrucks #SlateAuto #ScoutMotors #FarmEquipment #AutoRepair #IndependentRepair #NorthCarolina
@reoindustries
@slateauto

Please forward this to those who can advocate for real right to repair legislation or those who need to remove the legislation blocking “right to repair”

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

I have decided to create a couple of AI Bots watching Right to Repair at the State levels and at the National level.

Also considering a watch on laws that take away our Constitutional rights, but are subtle. Since I miss most stuff going to take a stab at using Grok Bot!

[Raymond Love @LoveRaym67]

@ineedaGandT @ChiefEngineerCE @reoindustries I want something more efficient than my full-size truck. I find myself gravitating back to a car to save on gas. I've always preferred efficiency, despite liking strong acceleration. Those tend not to mix well.