RE: Why no Tufskin Apollo?
I have tried the Apollo and the F161 in close comparison and to me the low planning threshold comes a lot from the longer rocker flat. This gives a very gradual transition between non-planning and planning and there is no need to pop the board out of the water. The tail width then helps to maintain a high pressure on the fin, which also needs to be powerful in order to lift the board out of the water.
I like the Apollo a lot since it has a more traditional feeling compared to traditional formula boards that are quite extreme and mainly focussed at high and low angles to the wind. For recreational low-wind riding I can recommend the Apollo, the only drawback being the gibe performance compared to freeformula. It also gives very early planning with smaller sails, like a 10.0, which normally only work in high winds on the more regular formula boards. Once planning the nose has to be kept clear of the water, this is an issue especially when going deep downwind, and I guess that could be a problem with a more durable construction and more weight in the nose.