The short answer
Both methods place material beneath a slab to restore support and elevation. They differ primarily in injection material, hole size, material weight, curing characteristics and price.
Polyjacking: expanding polyurethane foam
Mudjacking: cementitious/slurry material
Foam usually uses smaller holes
Slurry is heavier and often lower cost per square foot
Side-by-side comparison
| Factor | Polyjacking / Foam | Mudjacking / Slurry |
|---|---|---|
| Injected material | Expanding polyurethane | Cementitious/slurry mixture |
| Typical hole size | Smaller | Larger |
| Material weight | Lightweight | Heavier |
| Cure / return to service | Usually faster | Typically slower |
| Published price range | Often higher | Often lower |
Common questions
Which is better for Los Angeles?
There is no universal winner. Access, slab size, void volume, desired cure time, budget and contractor expertise should drive the choice.
Which method uses smaller holes?
Polyurethane foam systems generally use smaller injection holes than traditional mudjacking.
Use this information to compare quotes
Ask each contractor what material will be injected, how the original cause of settlement will be addressed, what is included in patching and cleanup, and what conditions are excluded from any warranty.