The Last Dagor is a fine lens, was a fine lens, and will always be a fine lens. As Clay suggests, the Dagor is efficient enough, with only 2 air/glass surfaces, that coating and multicoating are not a big deal.
The 'new lens' is the same as the 'old lens', just put into a different shutter. Schneider did nothing to it but buy the license from American Optical. So, is it still a creamy, lovely lens ? You bet. Can it still cut a face to ribbons if you let your process get out of control ? Absolutely.
Is it a nice, recent lens in a great shutter that will push you - as the photographer - to realize just a small portion of it's potential ? Yep.
For most folks' use of a 14" / 355mm lens on 8x10, a Tessar type lens ( Commerical Ektar ) has plenty of coverage. The Schneider Dagor, even restricted by it's mount, gives far more than the Ektar, and you'll never be wanting for more.
Contrast ? Specifically it's shadow flare you want to talk about, and whatever tendency to make softer shadows an uncoated dagor has, remember that the multiple surfaces of any plasmat (which unless efficiently coated is a flare machine !) make coating a far greater issue. It always has seemed to me that an uncoated Dagor was about the same as a single coated plasmat and, and the multi coating of your Dagor will not so much make the contrast unpleasantly high but give you freedom to shoot anywhere you wish. Night scenes in the city, foggy scenes on the coast.... anywhere you go this lens will be more than fine.
It is a fine lens for 8x10, and you should buy it, and shoot it forever. As long as it isn't too expensive !