So, @dhsilv2 got me to thinking... I saved a sample of III before the bottle kill and was lucky enough to stumble upon RRR V today. Nothing like a good head to head comparison. To start with III - from what is left I get a wonderful oak and wood spice (hard to tease apart but a mixture of vanilla paste, anise, dill, cardamon and clove) laden nose with musk, leather oil, dusty books, cherries, slight over-ripe banana and maybe even a bit of desert-wine notes. It is also just a slight bit lighter in color than V. So, enter V. A shade darker. Many of the same elements and I suspect oxidation might play a role but there is lest "dust" or musk and more fruit, specifically cherry, as well as some as some buttered pecan. There is also a bit of sweet tobacco that I pick up. The earthy, woodsy base is still there with a blend of vanilla paste, anise and dill and clove. It seems slightly less exotic but again, not fair to compare a newly opened bottle to an older sample. Long story short - they're clearly siblings. After another whiff will say that some of the caramel and bananas foster notes of III are diminished in V. Taste - let's start with V this time. Thin and dry, then vanilla and then a huge spice kick. There isn't a sharp left turn mid-palate like I remember with III but more of a building toward sweeter, candy cigarettes and dusty leather boots after the spice blast. Once everything settles there is a slight nutty bitterness that I don't recall III having. Going back to it the cherry fruit isn't as outstanding as the nose had suggested. A quick sip of III - much darker sugar up front and a stronger dill note. The "wait for it" swing in flavor from sweet and woody to dill spice, caraway and cardamon is still there. There is nothing really bitter to speak of on the finish, just woodsy/earthy spicy goodness with subtly sweet undertones. This is a tough one. The RRR III has a playful, "gotcha!" character whereas the V has a slightly fruitier, more well rounded landing on the palate. I would say that V also just tones down the spice and perhaps brings up the lacquer, making it drink like it is actually a tad older than III (which makes since because it is) but it doesn't do it in spades. It is still a beautiful iteration of MGP that has been lost in the younger batches that everyone else is rushing to put out, including SAOS once again. I think I like III a tad better for it's ability to stand out as different with such an interesting and prominent spice portfolio. This is in no way bad, and for the combination of dusty/leathery notes that lend to a more dry, spice-forward palate with a bit of fruit for $80-90 buying 2 is a no-brainer. This certainly clocks in with the complexity of a solid ECBP but likely won't please the ECBP crowd due to being less sweet. I'm going with a 4.5 on this one and will leave RRR III at 4.75. I can see the score on this one coming up with oxidation but honestly don't care. It is an excellent sipper with little left to be desired for the price point and hopefully relatively widespread availability. I'm probably inflating them both but am just happy to see Remus back!