Which engine self-destructs first? Lucas or STP?

Project Farm’s Todd runs a test no responsible mechanic ever would: deliberately starving a running engine of oil, once treated with Lucas Oil Stabilizer and once with STP, to see which additive actually buys more time before the engine seizes completely. It’s the latest entry in a channel built entirely on settling exactly this kind of gearhead argument with real destructive testing instead of marketing claims. Watch to see which product actually wins.

Todd, the mechanical engineer behind Project Farm, has built an entire channel around asking questions most car owners assume they already know the answer to, then actually testing them until an engine fails. This time the question is blunt: if you deliberately starve a running engine of oil, does a bottle of Lucas Oil Stabilizer or a can of STP actually buy you more time before it seizes? It’s the kind of test no responsible mechanic would ever run on a customer’s car, which is exactly why Todd’s channel exists to run it instead. The answer settles an argument gearheads have been having in comment sections for years.

A Test No Shop Would Ever Run

Project Farm’s format is built around exactly this kind of destructive, real-world product test: rather than reading a bottle’s marketing claims, Todd runs an engine deliberately without oil, once with a Lucas Oil Stabilizer additive and once with STP, timing precisely how long each treated engine survives before it seizes completely. It’s a test with an obvious real-world stake behind it — both products are marketed specifically on their ability to protect an engine during exactly this kind of emergency scenario, whether from a sudden leak or a missed oil change.

⚑ Featured Gear

Start Car Conversations →

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Meet Todd, the Channel’s One-Man Test Lab

Todd has built Project Farm into one of YouTube’s most trusted product-testing channels specifically by keeping tests methodical and repeatable rather than anecdotal — controlling variables like engine type, running conditions, and treatment dosage so viewers can trust the comparison isn’t skewed toward whichever product happened to get a lucky run. That rigor is why the channel’s engine-destruction tests in particular have become a reference point car enthusiasts cite directly when arguing about additive products online.

What Oil Stabilizers Actually Claim to Do

Oil stabilizers and additives like Lucas and STP are marketed on the claim that they thicken engine oil and coat internal components with a protective film that persists even after the oil itself has drained away or burned off. That claim is exactly what this test is designed to isolate: not how the products perform mixed into a full oil supply during normal driving, but specifically how much protection, if any, remains once the oil is gone entirely and the engine is running dry.

Lucas and STP, Head to Head

Running both products under otherwise identical conditions — same engine type, same starvation method, same monitoring for the moment of failure — lets Todd generate a direct, apples-to-apples comparison that neither product’s own marketing materials would ever volunteer. That head-to-head structure, repeated across dozens of different product categories on the channel, is precisely what’s made Project Farm’s tests more persuasive to skeptical viewers than manufacturer claims or even conventional written reviews.

Why This Follows an Earlier 10W-30 Test

This test builds directly on an earlier Project Farm video comparing how long an engine survives running on straight 10W-30 with no additive at all, which Todd links directly in the video’s description. Viewed together, the two tests let a viewer compare not just Lucas against STP, but both additive-treated results against a genuine no-additive baseline — a more complete picture than either test provides on its own, and exactly the kind of connected, cumulative testing that’s turned Project Farm’s back catalog into an informal reference library.

The Business Behind the Bottles

Todd’s own description thanks viewers specifically for suggesting the Lucas-versus-STP comparison and for “future video ideas,” a detail that points to how directly audience input shapes the channel’s testing queue — Project Farm’s most popular videos are frequently viewer-requested comparisons rather than tests Todd dreamed up independently. The description also discloses Amazon affiliate links for both products tested, standard practice for the channel and disclosed transparently rather than buried in fine print.

Why Viewers Trust the Verdict

What keeps viewers returning isn’t just the specific verdict on Lucas versus STP — it’s the format’s underlying promise that Todd has no stake in either product winning, unlike a sponsored review or a manufacturer’s own demonstration. That neutrality is worth something concrete to an audience that’s spent years watching additive companies make protection claims nobody could easily verify independently, and it’s exactly the gap Project Farm’s engine-destruction tests were built to close.

What the Verdict Means for Daily Drivers

For an owner whose main concern is a slow oil leak or a missed oil change rather than a full catastrophic failure, the practical takeaway from Todd’s test matters more than the exact number of extra minutes either additive bought the engine before seizing. Neither product replaces regular maintenance, and Todd’s own test setup makes that limitation obvious rather than glossing over it — the engines fail eventually regardless of treatment, just on a different timeline. That honesty, more than either brand’s specific performance, is what keeps viewers trusting the channel’s verdicts over the products’ own marketing claims.

The Additive Industry’s Marketing Problem

Oil additives occupy a strange corner of the automotive aftermarket, where decades-old brand names like Lucas and STP compete largely on reputation and shelf presence rather than independently verified performance data, since neither company is required to publish third-party test results the way engine oil itself is rated by industry bodies like the API. That’s precisely the vacuum Project Farm’s testing fills — not by claiming scientific authority the channel doesn’t have, but by applying the same repeatable, filmed stress test to every competing product, letting viewers draw their own conclusions from identical conditions rather than trusting either brand’s own claims at face value.

A Format Built for This Exact Argument

Comment sections under nearly any car maintenance video eventually devolve into additive brand loyalty arguments, with owners defending whichever product a trusted mechanic or relative recommended decades earlier regardless of new evidence. Todd’s videos don’t end those arguments outright, but they give both sides something more concrete to argue from than personal anecdote, which is likely why a test like this one continues generating active discussion in the comments long after the video itself was posted.

Watch the full video above. Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Republished by Blog Post Promoter