There is a factor involved in picking the correct powder besides looking at a general range of calibers - like 25-06 through 300 WM. In fact, in those two rounds listed is a bit of a clue, and one that experienced handloaders probably assume that everyone knows. This is called EXPANSION RATIO. Basically it is the relationship of the interior case volume to the bore volume. When you have a case, no matter what size, where the interior case volume is very large compared to the bore size, you will need to use a slower burning powder to extract proper pressure and hence velocity. If the bore is relatively large compared to the case, then you will use a faster burning powder.
Certain case sizes are often used throughout a gamut of bore sizes. For example, the 30-06 case is necked down and used in .25 caliber bores (25-06), .27 caliber bores (.270 Win), 7mm/.28 caliber bores (.280 Rem) - and necked up to be used in .33 caliber bores (338-06), and 35 caliber bores (35 Whelen). With each change in bore size the expansion ratio changes. Going from slow burning powders in the 25-06 to fairly fast powders in the 35 Whelen.
Stuffing a slow burning powder in the Whelen won't work because of several technical factors related to expansion ratio that prevent pressures getting high enough to get a clean, proper burn. Results can be sooty and erratic and would be considered by ballisticians to be sub-par.
On the other hand, a safe load of a particular powder in the 35 Whelen would not be safe in the 25-06 even though the two cases have almost identical capacity and the only difference is bullet diameter.
Dr. Lloyd Brownell PhD who wrote a masterful scientific tome on the subject of pressure based on scientific experiments says that the "The truth is, the multiple influences of diameter are too significant to overlook and too complex to cover in one short chapter."
So back to our examples, we will note that both the 25-06 and the 300 Win Mag have a case capacity to bore ratio much different than that of the 30-06. Both have a relatively large case capacity to the bore size. Because of that, they are able to use a very slow powder like WC-857 successfully. On the other hand, the .30-06 responds best to powders in the burning range of 4895 to 4350 - though it can use 4831 fine, although not enough of it can be put into the case to get the velocities and efficiency of the faster burning range. You will notice that it requires more of a slow burning powder to get results than a fast burning one. This is where the factor of not being able to get enough powder in the case comes in. And WC-857 is noticeably beyond 4831 in being a slow burner in the '06. WC-857 is a ball powder and ball powders are coated with a heavy deterrent coating to slow the burn. You absolutely need a certain amount of pressure to successfully burn this deterrent coating off. An older super slow ball powder was Hodgdon 870 and you absolutely couldn't get enough pressure with that in the '06 to make it burn right. WC-857 would be a gamble as well because it is a heavily-coated very slow ball powder.
Extruded (stick) single-base powders control the burn rate by the size of the granule, with larger granules being slower to burn. That is why they take up more room too.
If you get the idea that powders on the fast side are better in any given round, be aware that this is not so. They tend to have greater pressure spikes and can become erratic when approaching maximum. A bit too fast and they don't create the volume of gas needed to push the bullet to possible normal velocities. The slower powders create that engineered volume of gas and thus make the grade.
So I hope anyone reading this will take home the idea that one cannot choose powders willy-nilly and expect good results. There is a BALANCE that needs to be achieved in powder burn rate, expansion ratio, and bullet weight for optimum results.
So while everyone likes to save a buck, I would say it is a false economy to make grossly substandard reloads in order to do so by picking the wrong powder when there is so many to chose from. Certainly pulling bullets from bad loads is no fun at all, so why risk having to do that when your experiment in cheapness goes awry?