I received for testing the MBP-060, MBP-100, and MBP-150; I didn't receive the MBP-222. I tested the batteries with a running Mac OS X 10.6.2 Snow Leopard.

My testing procedure included running a Unix script that repeatedly copied and erased a 781MB file, thus keeping the computer's hard drive continuously in use. At the same time, I looped, at QuickTime Player's full-screen size, a 320MB MP4 video. For each test, I fully charged the MacBook and the battery being tested, initiated the test tasks, and then disconnected the laptop and battery from AC power; in other words, the result of each test indicates the total run time of the MacBook's own battery plus the connected battery. Testing was conducted with WiFi enabled and the MacBook's screen brightness at approximately two-thirds of full.

While this testing procedure isn't necessarily representative of typical laptop use, it was useful for creating controlled, consistent activity that allowed me to compare times across test runs. The graph above and table below show the run times I obtained for those trials:

As you can see, the three HyperMac batteries provided significant additional run time over the stock battery--from 58 percent for the MBP-060 to a whopping 205 percent for the MBP-150.

(If the MBP-222 offers performance roughly proportional to that of the MBP-100 and MBP-150, it should offer somewhere in the vicinity of 6:45 of additional Unibody MacBook run time, for a total run time of approximately 11:41.)