I do not think that Gene is representing the bike as a Lightning as it has been mentioned in MPH as a replica (701 page 53) and it has a "/2" stamped after the engine number. When talking to reporters or event promoters it is understandable that over-generalizations are made. This audience knows way too much about the details to accept over-generalizations. There could also be disagreements about what constitutes genuine Lightning parts as a stock series C UFM is indistiguishable from a Lighting UFM, other than the number (all series D Lightnings came with C UFM's). I suspect Gene was pointing out that the parts were not new copies.
Many of the Lightning parts came from Coburn Benson who had purchased lots of parts from Harry Belleville, who in turn purchased the Indian Sales Company spares when they sold out.
Because the bike is a replica it is more dificult to discuss the "original" parts and the original configuration of those parts. It also brings up the issue that the first and second definitions of the word "replica" have swapped in the past several decades. There was a time when a replica meant a factory built machine, i.e., the Series A TT Replicas, which I consider true replicas built by the Factory. The word now means "copy". It is always used this way when someone says "Grey Flash Replica", which I think is too kind to many of these machines while confusing the issue of the Series A TT Replicas.
David