That about sums it up, I guess. I don't travel very slowly in the RABs, but I don't go fast either. I don't ever enter a RAB when there are cars in the RAB, in either lane, that I can see.

No, the car was not in the RAB when I entered at 6. He must have entered at 9 after I entered at 6 but sped up to catch me. He came out of nowhere and that is what I distinctly recall. He scared the &*%$ out of me.

So in the time it took you to travel 70ft from the Morse South entrance of the RAB to the Stillwater West exit, about 3 seconds, the other car overtook you.

Since you didn't see the other car it either needed to be a little ways down Stillwater to the east or coming around the circle. In either case, that would be about 300 feet from the Stillwater West exit.

For the other car to travel 300 feet (otherwise you would have seen it) in the same 3 seconds it took you to get to the exit (otherwise it would have been behind you) the math says the car would need to be traveling between 50mph and 75mph through the RAB (and possibly from a standing start at the Stillwater gate).

I just traveled that same route on Morse heading south about 15 minutes ago. I think I recall better now what happened. The guy who cut me off was probably traveling south on Morse behind me in the left lane as I traveled south in the right lane. As I entered the RAB at 6 in the outside lane, he entered the RAB at 6 in the inside lane right behind me. I entered the RAB before him. He sped up to exit at 3 in front of me and rather than staying in his lane, he cut me off to get in front of me in my lane. It really doesn't matter if he switched lanes or not, he still would have cut me off as he sped up to exit in front of me at 3. I was heading to 12 to go straight. That is when I jammed on my brakes to avoid the collision. I think that explains it as best I can.

He was wrong.

I still find that hard to believe. I do not know the lengths of the vehicles but it would have to be a crazy maneuver to pass, swerve from the left, and exit right, if you entered first. Travelling from 6 o'clock to 3 is a short distance. I think one poster stated it takes 3 seconds to travel that distance. But, maybe you are a very slow driver.

That seems more likely and yes, he was wrong.

The guy didn't swerve left, he changed lanes from the inside lane to the outside lane. That maneuver is to "swerve" right. I hope I explained myself correctly.

I must say that 99.5% of the times I have traversed RABs, I have had no problems at all. It is usually uneventful and I feel very safe in the RABs.

I meant he had to swerve from the left lane to pass you and then exit. But, if you want to use the wording he swerved right, it is still the same timing.

Your car enters the RAB. You previviously said the 2nd car came out of nowhere which means it was some distance behind you. The second vehicle had to speed up significantly to pass you from the left lane. Then maneuver the length of his vehicle to cross your path and exit right without striking you. He had to do this within 3 seconds if you were travelling normal speed. Instead, you had to be driving very slowly for this to happen.

If this is the case, the driver in the 2nd vehicle was a lunatic. There is no need to speed up and pass a vehicle from the left lane to exit right. When in the left lane, slow down, drive around the inner circle, then exit safely. Hence the name, roundabout.

The guy may have wanted to be in the right lane to make the right turn into the Winn Dixie parking lot. That is my best guess. He must have entered the RAB right behind me. If I didn't look in my rear view mirror at that moment, then I didn't see him until he nearly collided with me.

Pondering
 

My thoughts, as well. Have also been doing a fair bit of pondering about what "might" be a significant issue that I don't think I've seen specifically addressed.

Seems to me that it might not be enough to merely say "yield to any vehicle already in the RA", nor even to go by the rule of thumb to "never be 'beside' a vehicle that is in the "inside" lane. I keep coming back to two concepts that I always struggle with - and wish that I didn't. Brings back memories of slogging through calculus courses, too.

Anyway, have often heard that it ain't "speed" that kills, it's the *differential* in rates of speed. Add to that the concepts of acceleration and deceleration, and my poor head really starts spinning - changes in *rates* of speed. That latter is where I'm picturing an issue that I suspect might deserve more discussion concerning these cool and potentially efficient traffic control devices.

Picture this scenario. An "inside" lane vehicle is approaching as you are dutifully slowing as you approach the RA. You time your "deceleration" such that you enter a car length or two *behind* this "right of way holding", inside vehicle. As you now accelerate back up to the 20mph rate allowed for this intersection, the inside vehicle, whom you know to have the right - and possible inclination - to freely exit at the very nearby next exit, and needing to cross your "now -accelerating" path, *decelerates* - *especially* with respect to "forward progress", as he has essentially slowed to *0* mph relative to *that* direction - which coincides with the direction in which you are currently *accelerating*. It's as if someone had passed you, changed lanes, and immediately "brake-checked" you for the period of time that it takes for him to completely cross your "outside" lane.

I ain't good enough at math to figger out what a good rule of thumb would be for how far (car lengths?) you should allow that inside vehicle to be ahead of you before you start entering (which would differ significantly depending on whether you had stopped or were merely slowing) nor how many seconds (Mississippis?) one should wait following the passage of said insider so as to ensure space for his potential, immediate exit to occur, stress free. Bet there's tons of retired engineers here in The Villages who could whip something up right quick for me. They could even leave out all the stuff on jerk, jounce, flounce, and pounce. :-)

My own, current rule of thumb for dealing with this scenario is to minimize my acceleration until it is totally clear to me whether this "insider" is or is not going to take that first exit option. I strongly suspect that this thumb rule is similar to that of most everybody *else's*, but would think that maybe finding a means of *emphasizing* it for the newbie - as well as for the "non-believers" :-) who cannot fathom a scenario which allows for another vehicle to turn across their path.

I'm working on controlling my inclination towards road rage when the guy behind me blows his horn or aggressively tailgates when I don't enter the RA at a rate that suits him. :-)

I experienced this just the other day. I was traveling north on Morse approaching the Osceola Hills circle. There was a vehicle in the inside lane of the circle. I slowed until that vehicle had passed my position but I did not need to stop. As I proceeded to enter the outside lane of the RAB, the vehicle which had passed was already exiting onto Deskin Ln. The amount of time it took me to turn my wheel to the right and begin accelerating into the RAB was all the time needed for the vehicle already in the RAB to begin his exit. By the time I reached any potential impact point, the vehicle was clear of my path.

I'll keep looking for examples but from this one instance it appears that if a vehicle entering the RAB properly yields to vehicles in the RAB then the spacing will be such that a collision will not occur.

OK. So, after being told that you should have seen him, you now say that he "was probably traveling south on Morse behind me".

It's a good thing you are in his way. Otherwise, he may be a hazard to others.

"If"
 

Agreed. My point is that it might be wise to *emphasize*, when teaching/learning the rules related to "two lane" RA's, just what "proper" yieldage includes. Seems likely to me that this detail might be commonly overlooked.

This should be good for another 200 responses.:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

Yes, that is exactly correct. He was too close to me to be able to speed up and cut me off. He entered the RAB right behind me in the inside lane right after I had entered the RAB in the outside lane. It is very clear in my mind now after I traveled that same route yesterday. He was wrong.

I think that poster is over thinking it.

I was in the right lane of Morse road waiting to enter the Moyer-Pinellas roundabout. There was a car left of me also waiting to enter the roundabout.

When the traffic cleared out, we both started going, but I let the person on my left get in front of me.

To my surprise, he cut me off and turned right. I was shocked, so I slowed down and let him make his right turn. No harm done.

This time…….

Over-thinking
 

I get that a lot. :-)

Surprisingly, it happened two more times in the next few weeks. That was about three years ago and it has not happened since.

I guess we slow drivers have more time to react.

Gotta admit, I'm not sure why you were shocked. You intentionally let him get in front of you, then he turned right which is a perfectly legal move. For you to complete your "I let the person on my left get in front of me" gesture, you should have given him enough space to safely do exactly what he did with nobody being shocked. He did nothing wrong.

He did something quite wrong. If I understand the situation correctly, the vehicle entering the RAB in the inside lane exited at the first exit. This is completely wrong. Credit goes to the driver in the outside lane for avoiding the collision.

OMG!!!! This is EXACTLY why there are problems in a RB. People who have NO CLUE what they are doing. You think it is perfectly legal to take the first exit from the inner lane? Even after about 50 posts on this thread have educated you to the opposite? Even after they post big direction signs at the entrance to the RB? Even after they hand you the Sumter County instruction booklet for navigating RBs??? 250+ posts and people STILL DON'T GET IT. Please stay far, far away from me in a RB. Pretty please with sugar on top.

OMG!! I misread the post I quoted! golfing eagles is 100% correct!! Consider my apology sent...and I hope you like the copious amounts of sugar on its surface!! :bowdown: Please put me back on your "I would drive a roundabout with this guy" list!! :) You too, Bill14564. You got me too! :)

And my apologies to you too, VAPeople. The driver in the inside lane was totally wrong. You were the accident-preventer. :)

Okay, I'm done. I hope you will all take me off your 'idiot' list...please!! :)

Consider it done. I thought you probably didn't really know what the poster was stating happened, so I went for the shock value. But while you're OK, how many of the ridiculous posters on this thread are still a danger to us all?

Now if the other 150+ wrong posters would fess up.:grumpy::(:police:

If the guy who entered the inside lane exited at his first exit, he would be wrong. Entering the inside lane, the driver must exit at his second, third or forth exit.

A driver in the inner lane can also drive the inner circle and then take the right exit he/she missed when entering the RAB. The first exit is not forbidden by the driver in the left lane. He/she has to do it correctly.

INCREDIBLE! When there are four exits, the first exit IS forbidden for the driver in the inner lane! If you are aware of a two-lane RAB in Florida where that is not the case, please post the location.

The FIFTH exit is not forbidden. The driver who mistakenly entered on the inside lane can go completely around the circle to exit correctly. By the time he does, he will have passed four exits making the exit he is taking the fifth, not the first. (and no, that is not just semantics)

Not semantics. You are merely rewording what I said to your liking. I said, the driver in the left lane must go around the inner circle then take the first exit he or she MISSED. Where did I say a driver could take the first exit immediately upon entering the RAB? Funny! You in an earlier post did not mention the driver could take your "so called fifth exit." Did I correct your wording to suit my needs?

Somewhere very close to here:

There is no correct way for the driver on the inside lane to take the first exit he comes to in a four-exit RAB. He can drive around the circle then take the road he missed due to entering in the wrong lane (as you wrote) but he cannot take the first exit. To insist otherwise is to perpetuate the misunderstandings and bad practices that could result in someone being hurt.

Again, you are just rewording what I said. I would not have had to make that post if you remembered to include the "fifth" exit as an option while correcting someone earlier. No one is perfect. Get over your slight and move on.

I will continue to believe there is nothing wrong with saying:take the circle to return to the first exit. It is not a NEW exit. It is an exit the driver missed.

Can you explain what o'clock is exit 5? In new exit terms like your proclaimed fifth exit. I can explain mine: If you miss the 3 o'clock exit while in the left lane, take the circle to return, then exit at 3 o'clock. If you do not have another name for the 3 o'clock exit, your logic is probably wrong.

This thread has been a joy ride. LOL.

"Never, in the field of human driving, has such a simple procedure, been made so very complicated!"

Attachment 100914

Over 200 times………

Add this (#278) to all the other RB threads over the years and I'll bet there are over 5,000 posts on the subject, 75% of which are wrong.

I guess this thread has finally come to an end. Anyone want to talk about dog poop?

Considering the number of posts expressing erroneous information, it's actually surprising there aren't more accidents than there are.
We must have a pretty high number of defensive drivers here in TV.