Previewed: The Gary Fisher Roscoe

Meet the Roscoe: the best trail bike Gary Fisher has ever made.

Among mountain bike companies, where "innovate or die" is the rule of the jungle statements like, "This is the best mountain bike we've ever made," are a dime a dozen. But when that quote comes from Gary Fisher, one of mountain biking's originals, it makes your ears perk up.

This is the Gary Fisher bike we've been waiting for. The brand has covered the XC race bike category well, and have covered the 29er category to death, but it has lacked a good, all-around trail bike.

Without further ado: meet the 5.5-inch-travel Gary Fisher Roscoe.

// DRCV
The first thing that demands attention is the Roscoe's unusual rear shock: the Fox RP23 DRCV (Dual Rate Control Valve). The shock is the product of a collaborative effort between Gary Fisher/Trek's suspension guru Jose Gonzales and Fox Racing Shox. The goal was to combine the beginning stroke of an efficient, small-volume-air-can shock, with the bottomless feel of a big-air-can shock.

Essentially, the shock is a conventional RP23 with an extra air chamber built onto the end. The standard air chamber is used for the first 40 percent of the shock's travel, but then a spring-loaded valve is activated, opening the second chamber, which effectively makes the unit into a high-volume air shock. Simple, effective and well executed. After two days of trail testing in Durango, Colorado, the DRCV lived up to the hype, transitioning smoothly between its small- and big-air-volume alter egos, pedaling with all the efficiency that RP23 rear shocks are known for with no discernable "hammock" in the middle of its spring curve.

The Roscoe's DRCV (Dual Rate Control Valve) combines the beginning stroke of an efficient, small-air-volume RP23, with the end-stroke of a larger-air-volume RP23, without the dreaded "hammock" effect in the mid-stroke of the larger-air-volume shocks or the harsh ramp-up of smaller shocks.

Reader Comments 

Posted Sun Sep21, 2008, 8:17 PM — By Drew

I rode a Roscoe III for about an hour, and it didn't disappoint. Worked well over roots, climbed well over rocks, weaved through tight trees and handled a couple short drops. I chickened out of a handlebar-high drop, but that wasn't the bike's fault. It seemed pretty easy to set up the shock, too (a Trek/GF mechanic set it up for me).

Posted Sun Sep21, 2008, 11:59 PM — By bertsy

gary fisher bikes are the kinds of bikes that will not turn your head everytime you see them on the trails. nothing so special on the designs of the bike.i mean look at that picture of the roscoe suspension design.it is so less engineering. its like ,oh lets just hang the suspension on the upper tube then thats it.the bike is not so tough and brave to look at.bikes whose suspension are hung on the upper tube is just not appealing.the design is so unmanly.

Posted Mon Sep22, 2008, 9:27 AM — By Paul

'I don't know what you just said, little kid....but you special man.....you reach out....and touch a brother's heart.....'

Posted Mon Sep22, 2008, 6:58 PM — By Mike Vandeman, Ph.D.

Bicycles should not be allowed in any natural area. They are inanimate objects and have no rights. There is also no right to mountain bike. That was settled in federal court in 1994: http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/mtb10 . It's dishonest of mountain bikers to say that they don't have access to trails closed to bikes. They have EXACTLY the same access as everyone else -- ON FOOT! Why isn't that good enough for mountain bikers? They are all capable of walking.... A favorite myth of mountain bikers is that mountain biking is no more harmful to wildlife, people, and the environment than hiking, and that science supports that view. Of course, it's not true. To settle the matter once and for all, I read all of the research they cited, and wrote a review of the research on mountain biking impacts (see http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7 ). See also http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/mtbfaq.

Posted Mon Sep22, 2008, 8:01 PM — By mountain biker

I wasted a good 15 minutes reading your "research paper" and I found your conclusions to be totally irrelevant to anything. Separating "mountain bikers" and "bicycles" is just like saying that hikers don't cause damage....only their boots do. Riding on trails doesn't kill small animals, or plants. It might take out an ant hill or two, or the occasional beatle...but where do you draw the line? A lizard? A mole? You can continue to extrapolate spurious data from these studies, or you could just remember that one bad apple doesn't ruin the whole bunch. Also, a bike review is not the place to start your revolution. Try the forum page...I'm embarrassed that I even responded right here.

Posted Tue Sep23, 2008, 12:00 AM — By Downhilldoug

You had to go there Mr PHD lets do this buddy. Forget about the 30 billion cars spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and the thousands of factory's polluting gods green earth with toxic poison (USA cycling had masks in china).In the scope of things a few mountain bikes going down a hill has very little to do with environmental impact. It is just about some people that had a bad experience with cycling they have nothing else to do but kill everyone’s fun. The real truth is cycling is just good clean fun, terrific exercise and environmentally friendly. By the way Gary Fisher is a really cool dude; Fisher was my first mountain bike.

Posted Tue Sep23, 2008, 6:33 AM — By jon steel

Mr Vanderman, you are a turkey who hates bikers so be honest about it and say what you mean, what about horses.It is people like you who would have access banned so no one can go into the wilderness. Who benefits then?

Posted Tue Sep23, 2008, 1:49 PM — By Xd

vandeman lives up to the Ph.D acronym: Piled higher, deeper.

Posted Fri Sep26, 2008, 8:44 AM — By Paul

US Forest Service issues guidance pertaining to mountain bikers The US Forest Service issued an agency memo that could benefit mountain biking in American National Forests. The memo, written by Deputy Chief Joel Holtrop, "clearly defines mountain biking as similar to hiking and equestrian use, and activity to be managed separately from motorized travel," according to IMBA. Previous studies have shown similar impact among hikers and mountain bikers and both user groups share many common objectives. Forest Service director for recreation, heritage and volunteers Jim Bedwell, made the announcement. "I want to emphasize that mountain biking is a non-motorized use of National Forest System trails, along with hiking and horseback riding. In our planning and policy documents, a distinction between mountain biking and motorized uses...should be made," said Holtrop in the memo. http://www.cyclingnews.com/mtb.php?id=news/2008/sep08/sep26mtbnews

Posted Sat Sep27, 2008, 10:27 PM — By Jim

What is the purpose of posting a remark about trail access in this area? It is not germane to the topic here. I would like to hear more about the bike. Thanks!

Posted Mon Sep29, 2008, 12:18 PM — By mike d.

Good call, Jim. Moving past the trolls.. The bike looks great! I have not ridden one yet, but it looks like another winner from GF. And *finally* it appears that someone in the graphics department got the memo that previous years of GF graphics have left a lot to be desired.. Any one else with ride time on this one? I'm curious as to how just a couple years ago the HiFi was the best bike GF has ever made, now this one is--am I to assume that they are speaking relative to specific platforms i.e. CC, All-Mountain, etc?

Posted Wed Oct 1, 2008, 5:12 PM — By Sandor

Dear Mike Vandeman, Ph. D., I am sorry your girlfriend would not have sex with you after she saw me. Please don't take it out on ALL Mountain Bikers. Thank You, Sandor

Posted Thu Oct 2, 2008, 10:27 AM — By E-Rock from Jersey

Dear Ms. Vander-dork, PHd: You make me sick. You have been dominated your entire life. Nothing changed. Bikes have no rights? You are a genius. You have no rights. I own you. Bikes dont damage the environment nearly as much as you have damaged your privates with your round the clock dolphin flogging to free asian tranny porn. You like to be dominated by 16 inch Dominican dongs that resemble black whiffleball bats. Take a report. You're Done. E-Rock.

Posted Wed Oct 8, 2008, 4:13 AM — By PhDless

Dear Dr. Vanderman You advocate closing off wildlife areas to human access in your papers, amoung other things. How interesting. Mountian biking does indeed impact the environment, just like hiking or anything else would. And yes, anyone on earth right to hike. Unfortunately for your "case" of limiting access to the wilderness, hiking is an activity which is much more easily accessible to the people, because as you said WE ALL HAVE FEET. Therefore I would hedge that there are a lot more hikers in the world than mountain bikers, especially when you account for the fact that "mountian biking" is an activity of a wealthy few in a minority of nations. In that light I think you have bigger feet- er fish to fry. In your papers, you also cite the invalidity of several studies on MTBing. Unfotunately you claim to have degrees in math, physics, psycology, and computer science. Good for you, but would the opinion of an environmental science or geology major be more "valid". -A disgru

Posted Sun Nov 9, 2008, 12:32 PM — By mr potato

I wonder who Built Dr. Vanderman's hiking trails. It wasn't equestrians or hikers thats for sure... The bike, ahh yess... I have ridden one and i would like everyone to know that this is by far the best full suspension 26" wheeled bike to come out of a Fisher (trek really) factory. The bike is superb both in its climbing ability (think goat) and in its prowess on the descents. Ill also make it clear that i think this is the funnest (is that a word?) trail/light AM bikes to date. I really think Fisher has got a winner with the Roscoe

Add Comment

Name (Required):

Email (Required, will not be shown to public):

Comment (Required, max chars: 1024):

You have characters left.

Type the characters you see in this picture