Mudjacking uses a heavy slurry of sand and cement, while polyjacking uses a high-density, lightweight expanding foam. Polyurethane is generally preferred in Colorado because it is waterproof, doesn't add significant weight to volatile soils, and requires smaller injection holes (about the size of a penny).

Yes.  In fact, it's common for us to "save" a slab that was previously treated with traditional mudjacking.

The primary issue with mudjacking is excessive weight. The traditional "slurry" of sand and cement is incredibly dense. Injecting that massive weight onto Colorado’s already unstable or expansive soils often encourages further sinking—essentially, the "fix" becomes the burden that causes the slab to fail again.

Lifting a previously mudjacked slab for us requires navigating the old "slurry" layer, which varies in composition from hardened concrete to loose, wet sand. Because this material adds significant weight and depth, we need drill deeper to reach stable ground and utilize a higher volume of high-density polyurethane foam to ensure a permanent, structural lift. This precision approach effectively neutralizes the added weight of previous repairs, stabilizing your concrete once and for all.

Poly is usually more expensive than Mudjacking, but not always.

However, even when the upfront cost is higher, but the long-term value is greater. While mudjacking has a lower initial price tag, it is a temporary fix that often requires a "re-lift" every few years due to its weight. Polyjacking is a permanent, one-and-done solution that saves you the cost and headache of repeated repairs.

So are you including the +2 repair cost into your question?

Mudjacking requires massive 2 inch holes (~ diameter of a soda can) to pump thick slurry.

⚠️ Patching is hard to hide; leaving large scars.

⚠️ Can lead to future cracking.

Homeowners choose Polyjacking because they want a premium, clean result. Poly Foam injection holes are 60-75% smaller & your driveway won't look like a construction zone when we leave.