<p>Link to HMC's common data set for Fall 2003 enrollees (Nos. 20-22; GPAs not weighted):
<a href="http://www.hmc.edu/information.html#general%5B/url%5D">http://www.hmc.edu/information.html#general</a></p>
<p>Link to aggregate Berkeley Fall 2003 admissions (p. 8):
<a href="http://cds.vcbf.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2003-04.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://cds.vcbf.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2003-04.pdf</a></p>
<p>Link to report on Berkeley's admissions for 2002 (including SAT 1 and GPA breakdown by college and major; GPAs appear to be weighted because of note for definitions in Berkeley's CDS):
<a href="http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/compreview/mooresreport.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/compreview/mooresreport.pdf</a></p>
<p>HMC allows highest math/verbal SAT score from multiple sittings; not sure about Berkeley. This isn't exactly apples-to-apples due to enrolled v. admitted data.</p>
<hr>
<p>Also not sure what you mean by ordering these schools from "best" to "worst" for engineers. I have family members who attended 4 out of the 8, and not one of them applied to more than any one of them (back in the day, I myself was admitted to Purdue and Cornell but didn't attend either). These are very different schools in many ways. Just by personal preference standards alone, consider the differences in climate, size, curricula, state v. private, geographical region, cost and available merit aid, social atmosphere, rural v. suburban v. city, etc. Some prospective engineering majors wouldn't even consider all these schools -- regardless of factors such as perceived prestige or matriculation difficulty -- e.g., aeroE.</p>