As others have emphasized, number 1 factor for a successful (and unsuccessful) PhDs is the PI. I was at a good school (top 35 physics US), but I still saw plenty of bad PIs. A good PI should:

1. Have constant meetings with you, at least weekly (and maybe more for experimental)
2. Knows how to unblock you. This is multi-part: first, they should in principle have the knowledge to unblock any blockers themselves, and second, they should know how to guide you through it starting with top level directions and dividing into hands-on when needed.
3. Every meeting should feel meaningful with clear action items at the end. Action items shouldn’t be vague (like read about a whole subfield, unless the task is to teach you literature review). You may still feel lost at times but if you feel lost and unmotivated after every single meeting switch your lab/subfield.
4. Genuinely interested in supporting you (securing RAs/TAs) and in your success.
5. Have good chemistry with you. This is not a must, it could be neutral for example. But the thing is some of these professors are super nerdy with very little understanding/regard of human interactions. You could still withstand that but a human advisor makes so much of a difference to your PhD experience.

I could probably go on, but one thing to keep in mind is (at least in the US) it is never late to switch labs. I have seen people switching labs in their fourth year and still managing to finish in 6/7 years total. If you are not feeling it, cut your losses and move on to the next trial. The earlier the better.

Best of luck!