My most concerning question!

[blaXXer]

Well, by that logic ou could ask why the Miranda wasn't replaced by the nebula class ;)

[ChronowerX_GT]

Well these are the specs of the 2 ships (memory alpha).

Miranda (Canon):
Type: Science Vessel/ Supply Ship
Length: 233m
Mass: 665,000 metric tonnes
Weapons: 6 phaser banks (type 7 (all config)), 2 phaser cannons (reliant), 4 Photon Torpedo Launchers.
Defence: Deflector Shields
Crew: 26 (Lantree Config)

Miranda: (DS9 Tech Manual):
Type: Medium Cruiser
Production Base: ASDB Integration Facility, Starbase 134 Integration Facility, Rigel VI
Accommodation: 220 officers and crew; 500 personal evacuation limit
Power Plant: One 1,500 plus Cochrane warp core feeding two nacelles; one impulse system
Dimensions:
Length: 277.76 meters
Beam: 173.98 meters
Height: 65.23 meters
Mass: 655,000 metric tons
Performance: Warp 9.2 for 12 hours
Armament: Six type-7 phaser emitters; two pulse phaser cannons; two photon torpedo launchers

Constitution Refit (Canon):
Type: Heavy Cruiser
Length: 305m
Mass: 1,000,000 metric tonnes
Crew: 300
Weapons: 18 phaser banks, 2 photon torpedo launchers
Defence: Deflector Shields and Defence Fields

[Aeries]

I would also like to point out that...

a. Reliant's pulse phaser batteries, like most pulse phasers seen so far, were really brutal and strong...

b. The enterprise may have had more phaser banks, but really... Its lack of two aft torpedo bays was pretty sad. Thus, I think the reliant had a much better coverage config.

c. With the constitution design... I dont imagine the ship would be half as easy to upgrade as the Miranda class, as I already explained.

So yes....

[ChronowerX_GT]

What I don't get is that the TOS Connie has at least 6 torpedo launchers. Why downgrade to 2?

I don't think that the age of the connie had anything to do with the battle. It was pratically a brand new ship after the refit. The Connie's larger design most probibly means that a single hit can't cause as much damage because the systems would be more spread out. Also the connie would have a larger crew so that means more engineers and repair teams.

[MLeo]

Maybe the original Connie had smaller torpedo storage? And they sacrificed the launchers for storage?

Or maybe newer technology increased the size of the torpedo launchers?

[ChronowerX_GT]

But even so, even if it did increase the size then why didn't they just leave TOS launchers on the aft? The only explination I can think of is that they changed the torpedos aswell.

[lint]

I would'nt put much faith in the ds9 tech manual,
it is infamous for being inaccurate.
Besides, i have never seen a Miranda fire Pulse Phasers.

[Larousse1995]

According to memory-alpha.org, the miranda has less phaser banks than the conny.  The miranda is classified as a science and/or transport "wessel" as the conny a heavy cruiser.  However, in ST:II the miranda was said to be of superior tactical importance.  Plus it was modified to be a warship while the conny was sitting at the smithosian.  By the stats, a conny could kik a miranda's hull-plated butt.  But actions speak louder than words

[blaXXer]

According to memory-alpha.org, the miranda has less phaser banks than the conny.  The miranda is classified as a science and/or transport "wessel" as the conny a heavy cruiser.  However, in ST:II the miranda was said to be of superior tactical importance.  Plus it was modified to be a warship while the conny was sitting at the smithosian.  By the stats, a conny could kik a miranda's hull-plated butt.  But actions speak louder than words

You may want to re-read that article. There are several variants of the Miranda-Class, among them the Lantree-type, the Brattain-type and of course the famous Reliant-type.

While the Lantree and Brattain may have been retrofitted to be science/transport vessels the Reliant or for that matter the Saratoga and the Sitak/Majestic were not.

Plus, it stands to reason the Reliant held herself pretty well against the Connie. We can disregard the battle in the Mutara Nebula, tho, since both ships were unshielded and Khan at a tactical disadvantage.