Baker’s 7 is not usually a Bourbon Cheapskate bottle.

At its normal price of around $69, it sits a little too high on the shelf for this series. That does not mean it is overpriced, necessarily, but it does mean it usually has to stand on a different battlefield. The Cheapskate lane is for bottles that deliver more than the price suggests, and $69 puts a bourbon under a little more pressure to impress.

But then Shores dropped Baker’s 7 to $39.

That changes the conversation.

At $39, Baker’s 7 slides just inside the Cheapskate boundary, and that gave me a chance to do something I had wanted to try anyway: put two different bottles of Baker’s 7 head-to-head.

The first bottle was one I picked up about 18 months ago. It was barreled in December 2016 and aged seven years and three months. The newer bottle, which I picked up a couple of days ago, was barreled in April 2015 and aged eight years and six months.

Same bourbon. Same proof. Same general idea.

But not exactly the same whiskey.

I poured both glasses blind and let them rest.

The aromas were similar, but Glass A immediately had the advantage. Its nose was stronger, fuller and more inviting than Glass B. It did not blow the doors off the room, but it made a better first impression.

On the palate, Glass A was solid and enjoyable. I picked up some tree fruit, cinnamon, brown sugar, caramel and light oak. The spice stood out quickly. This is a cinnamon-forward bourbon, and if you like cinnamon toothpicks, this one is probably going to speak your language. The mouthfeel was nice, though just shy of creamy, and the finish held onto the tree fruit, oak and plenty of that cinnamon. The color was light copper.

Glass B had a similar nose, but it was much lighter. Very light, actually. Dusty peanuts showed up early on the palate, followed by cinnamon, caramel, a touch of brown sugar and some oak. The mouthfeel was also a little thinner, though not unpleasant, and the finish was decent. Cinnamon and caramel did most of the work there. The color was also light copper, though slightly darker than Glass A.

Overall, these were clearly related bourbons. They were not wildly different, and I do not want to pretend they were. But Glass A was a solid step ahead in most categories. It had the better nose, the better flavor, a little more complexity and a more enjoyable overall pour.

Then came the reveal.

Glass A: Baker’s 7, aged eight years and six months
Glass B: Baker’s 7, aged seven years and three months

That was the order I suspected, though I was not completely sure. The 8-year bottle simply had a little more going on. It was more expressive, more balanced and more enjoyable.

The 7-year was not bad. Not at all. But side by side, the extra time seemed to matter.

At $69, Baker’s 7 is a bottle I like, but I am not sure it is one I would tell everyone to rush out and buy. At $39, though, the conversation changes completely. That is especially true if you can find one of the older bottles.

Baker’s 7 probably will not be the best bottle on your shelf.

But at the right price, it absolutely deserves a spot there.