I've read alot of recommendations that aging cheap kits doesn't do much but I beg to differ.
It is not that with less expensive kits, "aging doesn't do much", it is that in most cases aging does less than with premium or ultra premium kits.
The positive effects of aging continue longer for a wine that has more total dissolved solids (TDS). Less expensive kits generally have much lower TDS than the better kits. A low TDS wine will still improve, but will peak out much sooner than a high TDS wine.
(Very sweet wines will also age longer. They age because of the sugar content. They do improve with age, but don't necessarily improve in the same "manner" as a dry red. Rieslings can last 100 years.)
Just as an example, one low TDS wine will start improving and continue to improve for, say, the first year. By the end of that first year of aging, it might not get any better. It has peaked. (This is just an example!)
During the same year, a high TDS wine can do at least two of several different things:
1), it might improve at the same rate and be just as good at the end of that year. Side by side, the two wines may taste similar. However, the high TDS likely will continue to improve for several more years to come to get even better.
2), it might not improve at the same rate as the low TDS wine, so at the end of that year, it will not even be close to being ready to drink. However, each year it will continue to improve until one day you open it and think you must have opened a different wine than its last sampling.
Number 2 is usually the case for me and my wines and I would guess it is for most home wine makers..
So, IMO, in the end the higher TDS kits will most generally make the better wine. Of course it all depends on how long you want to wait. Sometimes, having to wait several years for a wine to be drinkable is a real chore. Sometimes it is a matter of how much we are able to spend. Either case is a valid point.