Your over thinking it. The rings move as engine is running. The ring gap does not stay in original spot that you put it. Reason for putting stagger on the different openings is so that you don't have a direct path (openings over each other) into the crank case.

My opinion.

Couple things here...
Ring gaps don't stay oriented in any way shape or form. The cross hatch angle in the cylinder will promote ring rotation...if done properly.
Opening up the second ring; this has been done for decades, now, and it helps prevent pressure form building between the first and second ring. Every cylinder has blow by and if enough pressure is allowed to build between the top two rings, the top ring will lift off the land in the piston and lose it's seal. Compression rings have to seal in two places...they have to seal against the cylinder wall, and they have to seal against the ring land in the piston or they won't hold compression (cylinder pressure).
Moly rings; it's my understanding, through talk in the industry, that no one is manufacturing moly rings any more. What's out there is all there is. With the advent of the OEM's going to narrower rings and going to steel, the after market just can't support the manufacturing cost of a Moly ring and it;s costing ring mfgrs more to make a Moly ring than they can sell it for. Steel rings are no harder on a cylinder than anything else. Look at the Cup teams that run a .9mm (.035") steel ring for 500 mi @ 9000 rpm (and honestly I believe they're closer to .7mm these days). These rings have coatings on them that are harder than diamonds and both the rings and cylinders, after inspection, show zero wear. The down side to this for the enthusiast is, while a Moly ring will seal on just about any cylinder finish, steel rings will require a lot more attention to detail for the machinist and he needs to have his game on when finishing for steel rings. ONe place where technology has improved is ring flatness, where a typical .043" MOly ring will have a flatness tolerance of +/- .0005, but if you look at that, it means there is a total flatness variation of .001" and when we're depending on that surface to seal against the land in the piston, that's not very flat. Newer ring technology is calling for flatness in the .00015" range and that provides a lot better sealing just from the ring standpoint alone. We can also look at reciprocating mass...on a 4.50 bore, the difference between a traditional 1/16" ring, and a .043" ring is 6 grams! Double that for both rings and you just reduced your recip. weight by 12g just by going to a slightly narrower ring. That may not seem like much, but try and take 12g off a piston or rod some time and see just how much material that is. It's a significant amount and will do nothing but contribute to longevity and reliability.

Thanks for the post, good read. I'll check the second ring gap and open it up if needed.

scott,i am not understanding your comment of + or -.0005 being .001.if i understand it correctly .0005 is the total amount of measured difference the ring can have,not from centerline of ring to face but i may be wrong.imo .001 is a lot.i totally agree that steel rings won,t hurt the bore with the coatings we have at our disposal today.

if you plan on reinstalling the used rings i would not change the gap now.jmo.

Flatness of +/- .0005 = total deviation of .001. Not face flatness, but flatness as when you lay the ring on a table. Most "performance" rings are ground flat but, for example, Total Seals AP (Advanced Profile) rings are lapped and can achieve a much flatter surface to seal on the ring land in the piston. I would venture to say a 5/64 iron ring isn't even ground, but parted on a lathe and left with a machine finish. This is why I told the OP don't worry about the gap...that ring is losing a lot of seal just in it's inherent design.

I understand the theory on opening up the second ring end gap. My question is what about the total seal gap less
Rings? Or do you not recommend using those style rings?

i used them in my boat engines and several others,so far so good but they are pricey. total seal ap rings are great and i used them in a buddy,s builds that have a ton of hours and still have a great seal.

I've used a few times and they had great leak down numbers years later.My ls motors are getting them.

The gapless rings are fairly inexpensive when you compare them to the other rings total seal offers.