window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'UA-145405933-1');

Which is Better: Mudjacking vs Foam?

January 12, 2024
Which is Better Mudjacking vs Foam

When it comes to concrete lifting and leveling, two methods reign supreme: mudjacking and polyurethane foam lifting. Both have their merits, but if we dive into the nitty-gritty details, it’s clear that polyurethane foam lifting has some distinct advantages.

The Basics: What is Mudjacking?

Mudjacking is a concrete lifting method that involves drilling holes into the concrete slab and pumping a slurry of water, soil, sand, and cement underneath. This mixture is forced beneath the slabs using hydraulic pumps and lifts the slabs back into position. The material never completely hardens or dries. This technique has been used for decades and is a popular choice for many contractors.

The Case Against Mudjacking

While it’s true that mudjacking has been around for a long time and can indeed lift and level concrete, there are a few drawbacks that might make you think twice before choosing this option.

Messy Process

First off, mudjacking can be a messy ordeal. The slurry used to lift the concrete is mixed on site every job. Mixing material onsite makes a mess and usually requires the concrete surfaces to be washed down with water.

A lot of mudjacking companies do not offer caulking/joint sealing due to the concrete being wet after the repairs are completed. Caulking/joint sealing the repaired areas is an extremely important part of the repair.

Less Precision

Mudjacking doesn’t offer the same level of precision that polyurethane foam does. Because the mud slurry is denser and less expansive than foam, it doesn’t fill all the voids under the concrete as effectively. This can result in uneven lifting, requiring further adjustments down the line.

Weather Dependent

Freezing and thawing cycles can cause the mudjacking material to expand, push up on the slabs and cause cracking of the concrete, meaning you might find yourself replacing the concrete or revisiting the same area in the future.

Larger Drill Holes

As mentioned earlier, the holes required for mudjacking are significantly larger than those for foam lifting. These larger holes are more noticeable and can be considered an eyesore by some, particularly on decorative concrete surfaces where aesthetics are important.

So, while mudjacking isn’t without its merits, these drawbacks make a compelling case for why polyurethane foam lifting may be the better choice for your concrete lifting needs.

Enter the Newcomer: Polyurethane Foam Lifting

Polyurethane foam lifting, on the other hand, uses a two-component foam that expands after being injected under the concrete slab. The foam expands beneath the concrete filling voids and lifts the slabs back into its original position. This technique has been around for more than 20 years and is gaining traction rapidly, and for good reason.

The Argument for Polyurethane Foam Lifting

Speed and Efficiency

Most projects are completed in just a few hours and can be driven over/walked on immediately. Unlike mudjacking, where you might need to wait for the slurry to set, polyurethane foam hardens almost instantly. This means less downtime and quicker completion, allowing you to use the surface much sooner. Bob Vila confirms this, stating that foam lifting allows you to use the area within 15 minutes of the procedure.

Less Invasive

Mudjacking requires larger holes to be drilled into the concrete slab, typically ranging from 1-2 inches. Polyurethane foam lifting requires holes as small as 3/8 of an inch. Not only does this mean less noticeable patches, but it also makes the process less invasive and disruptive.

Better for the Environment

Although mudjacking uses natural materials like soil and sand, the process can consume a lot of water. Polyurethane foam is a more eco-friendly alternative, as it requires less water and material to be effective. Concrete Network goes into detail about how polyurethane is more sustainable and effective in the long run.

Durability and Longevity

Polyurethane foam is highly durable and less susceptible to erosion compared to mudjack material. While the slurry used in mudjacking may wash away or deteriorate over time, especially in harsh weather conditions, polyurethane foam remains intact and offers a long-lasting solution.


Polyurethane foam lifting is incredibly versatile. Whether you’re dealing with a residential driveway, commercial sidewalk, or even an industrial warehouse floor, this method is highly adaptable to different environments and requirements.


While mudjacking has its merits and is a tried-and-true method for concrete lifting, polyurethane foam lifting offers significant advantages in terms of speed, invasiveness, environmental impact, durability, and versatility. Next time you find yourself faced with sinking concrete, consider going the polyurethane route for a more modern, efficient, and long-lasting solution.

Choose Expert Concrete Raising: Your Local Minneapolis Preferred Choice

When it comes to something as crucial as concrete lifting, you want to make sure you’re in the hands of experts. That’s where Expert Concrete Raising comes in. As your local Minneapolis preferred choice for polyurethane concrete lifting, we combine state-of-the-art technology with unparalleled expertise to give you the most efficient, effective, and long-lasting solution for your sinking concrete.

We pride ourselves on our commitment to customer satisfaction and our keen eye for quality. With polyurethane foam lifting, we offer a superior alternative to traditional mudjacking methods, ensuring that you get the best bang for your buck—both now and in the long run.

Don’t settle for less when it comes to your home or business. Choose Expert Concrete Raising for a concrete lifting experience that stands head and shoulders above the rest.