Most everyone disagrees but i'll say it anyway .............why go larger on 2nd ring gap?.....if machine work is done correctly for the ring pack being used then blowby should be minimal ,excessive 2nd ring end gaps on street motors will have oil contaminated along with regular oil changes , the larger the 2nd ring end gap the wider the trail of oil entering top ring land through endgap , cast iron rings will expand @ a lesser rate than ductile/steel & will also be subjected to less heat , the iron ring will also wear @ a faster rate than steel , gapping bothe rings the same would end up with a larger 2nd end gap in a running engine....... take the gapless top ring for example , Total Seal say these type rings installed correctly have near on zero blowby , yet they recommend 2nd ring gap to be larger than top end gap , an example was a 4500 bore running nitrous (250 shot) , total seal recommended top ring end gap .007 X bore = .032" , 2nd gap .008 x bore= .036" , this was a street motor whereby engine oil was changed every 1000 miles due to contamination , i'm still baffled as to why Total Seal recommend such large 2nd end gaps considering blowby being near zero with these rings. , i asked the question directly to Total Seal on another forum & got no reply.