SSD recommendation

The difference with write speeds (Crucial very off) makes it easy to either go for the Kingston or PNY (Kingston bigger name in the game).

You want to use this for recording TV? That's WAY overkill

The 100% quiet, lower mechanical errors over the years (no moving parts), lower power profile, makes it worth the money, even if the full speed is not used.

I want to eliminate the HDD as much as possible, I'm not talking about recording TV 12 hours a day constantly or anything, more likely maybe 12 hours a week at the most (my current tv recordings occupy about 30Gb), and the occasional time I watch TV live then there is a 30 minute buffer.
I don't think it should be much of a problem using the SSD for it.

(after Kim's comment do you mean its a waste?)

I've read several reviews about the Kingston not being anywhere need the advertised speeds, more like half the advertised speed?

So the Kingston is OK then - you would recommend it?
If so I'll put the order in now.

Yes I would recommend it.

Have you been using a DVR for a while? My media center has been in production for nearly 4 years and HD TV takes 6 GB per hour on average. A 120 GB drive with host OS is 15 hours of recording at best.  I don't know what disk drives you've been using but standard SATA drives are very quiet. As far as reliability, platters are reliable and if you have critical data you MUST use  mirror or better RAID regardless of drive type. And this is a DVR type system that few people would call critical.  

My media center has 15TB.

I don't keep stuff (maybe the odd thing) so once its watched its gone - there is no build up of years old programmes.
I would backup it up daily (or so) to the HDD.
Part of the reason for the SSD is to reduce the temperature in the box - it's in an enclosed area so not much air circulation. The HDD can run about 40C

You can absolutely do it, I'm just saying that all things considered it's like buying a sports car to drive two miles down to the train station every day. Absolutely works, but its only a two seater and it's really expensive and unnecessary for it's purposes. A more typical drive will cover you just fine. My 1 TB recording drive handles 5 recording streams at once as well as playback. And even if 120 GB is fine for now, what happens next year when more programs come on or your significant other wants to record a few things... or you go on a 2 week vacation. This is TV... it's not life altering or anything, but you'll almost certainly be at least annoyed the first time you run out of space unnecessarily.

sports car to drive two miles down to the train station every day

There's something wrong with that...

If the SSD gets too full I can always move stuff on to the HDD.
WAF is already high - if the box was more silent it would be higher.

After reviewing some tests on the Crucial I'm abandoning it - write speeds can be terrible (20mb)
So I've come up with another two, and I think the Samsung is what I am going to go for (tests on it were great)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-Series-120GB-Solid-State/dp/B00F0RD3ZM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1395419654&sr=8-1&keywords=INTEL+Solid-State+Drive+530+Series+-+120+GB
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-120GB-Basic-Solid-State/dp/B00E391KA8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1395419594&sr=8-1&keywords=SAMSUNG+840+EVO+MZ-7TE120+-+120+GB

So unless someone can give me a reason not to I will order the Samsung.

The Samsung indeed has very nice benchmarking results.    I've certainly not seen any issues with the M500's, although any SSD will have period of slow writes during internal garbage collection.     My criteria for SSDs is really simple:  #1 - reliability;  #2 - reliability; #3 - reliability.    I don't care about anything else :-)     As I noted earlier, the end result of that is I only buy Intel and Crucial units, as of the several hundred SSDs I've installed, these are the only two brands that I've never had issues with (and their reputation matches my experience).