Mudjacking vs. Polyurethane Lifting: Which Is Better for Your Driveway? Is Your Driveway Sinking? Here’s What You Need to Know
If your driveway has settled, cracked, or become uneven over time, you might be wondering what the best repair option is: Mudjacking or Polyurethane Lifting? Both methods are designed to raise sunken concrete, but they work very differently and the results are far from equal.
In this guide, we’ll break down the key differences between mudjacking and polyurethane lifting, helping you to decide the best long-term solution for your driveway.
What is Mudjacking?
Mudjacking is a traditional method of concrete lifting that involves:
- Drilling large holes (up to 2 inches in diameter) into the concrete.
- Pumping a slurry mixture of cement, soil, and sand underneath the slab.
- Raising the slab as the mixture fills the voids under the concrete.
Cons of Mudjacking:
- Heavy Material: The mudjacking slurry is dense and can weigh 100lbs or more per cubic foot, adding extra stress to the soil underneath.
- Temporary Fix: Because of its weight, the added material often causes re-settling within a few years.
- Slow Cure Time: Mudjacking can take 3-5 days to fully set before the driveway is usable.
- Messy Application: Large drill holes and excess slurry can lead to visible patching.
What Is Polyurethane Foam Lifting?
Polyurethane concrete lifting is a modern alternative to mudjacking that uses a lightweight, high-density foam to raise and stabilize sunken slabs. The process involves:
- Drilling small holes (typically ⅜ inches or about the size of a dime).
- Injecting an expanding polyurethane foam underneath the concrete.
- The foam quickly expands and hardens, lifting the slab within minutes.
Related: The Polyurethane Concrete Lifting Process
Pros of Polyurethane Lifting:
- Lightweight and Strong: Polyurethane foam weighs only 2-4 lbs per cubic foot, minimizing soil stress and preventing re-settling.
- Fast Cure Time: Most driveways are ready to use within 15 minutes after application.
- Waterproof and Long-Lasting: Unlike mudjacking, polyurethane won’t erode or wash away over time.
- Smaller Drill Holes: The injection process uses ⅜ inch holes, making repairs less visible and more precise.
Cons of Polyurethane Lifting:
- Slightly higher initial cost than mudjacking, but the long-term durability means less maintenance and lower overall cost.
Mudjacking vs. Polyurethane Lifting: Side by Side Comparison
| Feature | Mudjacking | Polyurethane Lifting |
| Hole Size | 1-2 inches (visible patches) | ⅜ inch (dime-sized, minimal impact) |
| Material Weight | Heavy (100+ lbs per cubic foot) | Lightweight (2-4 lbs per cubic foot) |
| Cure Time | 24-72 hours | 15 minutes |
| Longevity | Prone to re-settling | Permanent lift with moisture resistance |
| Water Resistance | Can wash out over time | 100% waterproof |
| Cost Over Time | Short-term fix (may require rework) | Long-term solution (lower lifetime cost) |
Which One Should You Choose for Driveway?
If you’re looking for a fast, durable, and long-lasting driveway repair solution, polyurethane lifting is the best choice. While mudjacking may seem like an easier and cheaper option upfront, it often requires rework in just a few years, leading to higher long-term costs.
Choose Polyurethane If You Want:
- Minimal disruption
- A long-term, stable fix that won’t wash out or resettle
- A cleaner, less invasive repair with smaller drill holes
Final Thoughts
Both mudjacking and polyurethane lifting can raise sunken concrete, but only one offers a modern, long-term solution. If you want a stronger, faster, and more durable fix, polyurethane is the way to go.
Still have questions? Contact our team today!
Call Us: Eastern Iowa (319) 535-2401
DSM (515) 249-1638
Illinois (309) 761-6398
Email Us: contact@concretepolyfix.com
