All I'm saying is that Kodak specifically identifies only one other film as being identical to Kodalith, and that's Ektagraphic. Contrast and Kodalith are entirely different films. Recall all this talk about lith films having really thin bases? Contrast has a really thick base.
Given that they're two films of essentially the same speed, but 1) Contrast does not have the characteristic thin lith-style base, 2) They produce vastly different results in the same non-lith developers, and 3) Kodak does not recommend Kodalith as a developer for Contrast. I see no reason to conclude that it is a lith film.