The headline number is well known by now. NAAMSA data referenced in the study shows challenger brand share of new vehicle sales has roughly tripled in four years, from around 3% in 2020 to 11% in 2024 – in unit terms, from just over 10,000 vehicles a year to more than 52,000. What is more telling is where that share has come from. It has not come from the elite end of the market, and it has not come from buyers who were never going to buy a legacy brand in the first place. It has come from the middle, and it has come from buyers who used to be legacy customers.
The study identified four buyer mindsets shaping car choice today: Aspirational Upgraders make up 36% of the market, Cautious Considerers 27%, Smart Value Maximisers 20% and Established Loyalists 17%. The composition of these groups is where the story lives. Among current challenger brand owners, Smart Value Maximisers make up 34% of the base, against just 21% of legacy brand owners. Established Loyalists – the consumers who reduce uncertainty by sticking with what they know – represent 19% of legacy owners but only 6% of new-entrant owners.
In other words, the switch is concentrated exactly where legacy brands cannot afford to lose ground. Aspirational Upgraders, who want a premium feel at a real-world price, sit at 35% of legacy owners and 49% of new-entrant owners. The buyers most open to paying for the upgrade are the ones who have already decided the upgrade does not need to wear a German badge.
Loyalty has not disappeared, but it has softened. And the study showed me how rational that softening actually is. One respondent put it plainly: “Driving a BMW X3 for the look … whereas now, will rather spend money on my house.” Another respondent, in our highest vehicle-value focus-group cohort, said: “It is no longer about a definition of value for money, it is now the re-definition of value for money … which is connected to me losing my ego and being sensible.” This is not about consumers reluctantly trading down. It is consumers consciously trading sideways – or in many cases, trading up on tech, space and warranty while paying less.
The category has shifted from asking “can I trust this brand?” to a much more demanding question: “what is this brand doing for me, right now, that justifies its cost?” Heritage answers the first question, it does not answer the second.
For the motoring sector, the implication is uncomfortable but workable. Elite legacy brands remain the gold standard that new entrants are still emulating – they are not the casualties here. The casualty is the mid-tier. Too expensive to compete on value, and no longer prestigious enough to compete on aspiration, mid-tier legacy brands are squeezed by both ends of the market simultaneously. The cars themselves are not the problem. The value story around them is.
The brands that respond to this will not be the ones that cut prices. They will be the ones that bundle features into simpler, more inclusive packages, extend warranties to match buyer expectations, and explain – in language consumers actually use – why their cost is worth it today, in this economy, for this driver. The challenger brands have done the work of reframing what consumers think they are entitled to expect. Legacy brands have to do the work of justifying what they continue to charge.
The share is not coming back on its own. The buyers who switched did so consciously, and the buyers who are watching them switch are taking notes. The window to respond is open.
Project Crossroads is a proactive study by KLA, conducted in 2026. The research combined a quantitative panel survey of 1,082 South Africans through KLA’s YourView Consumer Panel, four focus groups in Gauteng with recent new-entrant vehicle buyers, and ethnographic interviews with five higher-LSM households in Gauteng and the Western Cape, layered over desk research and NAAMSA industry data. For more information, email az.oc.alk@seiriuqne and reference Crossroads.
