Can anyone elaborate on the differences between a Drill and a Mill as
far as the relative size, placement, and materials when it comes to the
chuck, spindle, quill, arbor, collet, bearings, gears, ect.?

In other words, it's obvious that a mill can move the tooling along
more than a single axis, unlike the drill press, but I am attempting to
get a handle on the *physical* reasons why so many here say that a
drill press shouldn't be adapted to mill use.

If these physical reasons can be solved with only small manufacturing
changes in drill presses to allow them to become more suited for
milling, then does the conventional drill presses unsuitability have to
do with the bottom line of the manufacturers or lack of consumer
interest responsible for a lack suitable adapers/tooling, or perhaps
there are other logistical issues involved?

I've heard about the specific forces that the bearings and so forth
would have to take as being a reason for a drill presses unsuitability
for milling operations, but it seems to me that a suitable gearing
adapter would negate much of these "lopsided" forces.(Probably at the
expense of a lot of power).

Also, I figure that since so many of you have been machining for so
many years, is there a possibilty that any bad drill press milling
experiences are at least in part a result of a lack of availability of
suitable adapters and tooling for this?

Anyway, in the meantime I will of course still take the advice of not
using a drill press for milling purposes, but only when it comes to
metals, because there shouldn't be as much of a problem with plastics
like Nylon or Delrin.(But I'll listen to opinions either way). :-)

Thanks a lot.

Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.