Having my setup before and after the charge air cooling the difference was huge. And not all top-end like I would have thought. I had increased power all over, the most noticeable was actually down low, around 1000rpm to 1800. I can't explain it but it gained so much torque from that darn CAC. And I've read others say the same thing. Obviously WOT got a nice bump as well. So it was kinda like better everywhere but really noticeable low and high rpm.
This is exactly what I noticed as well. Surprised, especially since this is a non wastegated setup and was expecting there to be added lag because the 6.0 intercooler is "too big" and 3 inch intercooler tubing is "too big".
No doubt. Having an intercooler will always be a benefit, it's just how much that remains to be determined. I'm glad you've seen what you did in the before/after. And it's interesting that you notice most of it down low, where the factory turbos would likely be inefficient as well.
This is probably controversial, but I don't think you can go too big on intercooler piping, within reason of course. The amount of CFM an engine consumes makes the volume difference between 2.5" and 3" pipe a moot point. Your talking tenths of a cubic foot difference whereas the engine is consuming 10+ times that amount per second. I'd be surprised if one would experience lag, much less measure it.
My first-hand experience with intercooling is limited to a diesel ranger but I agree with this. The difference in power was noticeable, with no additional fuel needed. Lag? I couldn't tell if there was any more after all the added piping. Some day when I get my 6.9 intercooled I'll know for sure.
