It is great to hear that you're looking to get involved in research during your first year.
The thing I will say about research is that top schools (e.g. uoft, stanford) care more so about your publications or output. You certainly don't have to wait until 4th year to publish, and you're right that many people don't even end up publishing their thesis because the quality or quantity of research is insufficient for publication, beyond a talk at a local conference. From this perspective, I would say choose the lab where you presume you could have the chance of getting an output.
As someone who has been involved in many wet labs before transitioning to review projects, I wouldn't necessarily say that the latter is any less interesting, especially since you're typically working towards a product in which you can call your own.
Another possibility could be to work on project 2 in the summer, and see if you can continue in project 1 as a volunteer over the course of your undergrad.
For both PI's I recommend that you check their researchgate and get a sense of the quality and quantity of their publications. Also, don't get too caught up with affiliation, I've had more successful experiences at universities like Brock/Calgary than one's like MIT/Harvard as what matters is the experience/output. Perhaps the lab is more established, but as the above commenter mentioned, you should also take things like lab culture and PI mentoring style into account. Will they have time to meet with you and discuss your progress or lab goals?
Either way, if you opt for the first lab and still would like to potentially get a taste of what working on a scoping/systematic review feels like, feel free to send me a message and we can discuss you getting involved in one of my projects.
Hope this helps and best of luck!
proper summit
ornate hull
timber birch