Drop caps

Possibly... You're assuming mismatched aerodynamics. I will note, that in this
atmosphere, a bowling ball and a feather, the bowling ball comes down faster.
Yes, mismatched aerodynamics, but in the other direction than yours.:)

[Tomb] I was thinking more like a lawn
dart and a streamlined plane. The plane has to carry N persons, the dart but
one. Should it not be possible to arrange better aerodynamics for the dart?

First statement I won't agree with. Second sounds fine... But also note less
fuel... Specifically I doubt it has
enough fuel to accelerate and de-
accelerate... There's also the fact that at some point, you get a very
ineffieciant way to ship people down... Lot of money, mass, and volume per pod
for little to no advantage.

[Tomb] Less fuel, but it gets a heck of a lot
more delta-vee out of the same kgs of fuel.
Hence I'm not sure it can't do both accel and decel. But how about we posit a
railgun or mag accelerator launch? That'll give you a nice boost without
requiring reaction mass.

This is a does too does not argument as far as I can see. I don't see any
reason why a dropcap can't carry the same proportionate mass of fuel (it has
the same heating concerns as the shuttle) but it'll still be lighter and more
capable for two reasons: It doesn't have to carry enough fuel to get back to
orbit (big point) and it doesn't have
to do complex hovering or other near-
ground operations (lander might not have to do this either). The lander has to
carry a more capable system as its targeting is less ballistic and it is
expected to be able to make a directed flight back to the source ship.

I think the combination of a better potential aerodynamic structure (not
trying to move N men to the ground) and an ability to (with the exact same
proportion of mass as fuel as your lander) burn all the fuel in the trip down,
the drop cap will have a faster time to ground.