Call Now: (905) 686-1088

Rubber or Concrete Resurfacing?


Rubber or concrete resurfacing. A comparison between the two.

Pour-in-place rubber resurfacing involves the application of a liquid rubber mixture onto an existing concrete, tile, or asphalt surface to form a robust and seamless resurfaced layer that is both slip-resistant and weatherproof. This method is frequently utilized on playgrounds, pool decks, driveways and walking surfaces.

Concrete resurfacing, on the other hand, entails applying a fresh thin layer of concrete onto existing concrete surface. This enhances both durability and aesthetics without the need to replace the entire concrete structure.

Cost Comparison

Initial Cost: When comparing the upfront expenses of resurfacing with rubber and concrete, rubber resurfacing typically cost more due to the higher cost materials. Conversely, concrete resurfacing generally has lower upfront costs since it utilizes readily available traditional concrete materials.

Long-Term Cost: When considering long-term expenses, rubber resurfacing offers advantages over concrete resurfacing.

Rubber surfaces are renowned for their durability and minimal maintenance needs, reducing the frequency of repairs, replacement, and regular maintenance. Rubber surfaces resist cracks, chips, and fading, resulting in potential cost savings over time. Furthermore, rubber resurfacing often requires minimal maintenance, such as occasional cleaning, sealing, or reapplication, which can be done at a relatively low cost.

In contrast, concrete surfaces may require more maintenance and repairs throughout their lifespan, leading to increased long-term costs. While concrete resurfacing may have lower initial costs, the durability and low maintenance of rubber resurfacing can make it a more cost-effective choice in the long run.

Durability and Lifespan Comparison

Rubber resurfacing is widely recognized in the surfacing industry for its exceptional durability, resistance to cracks, chips, and impact. It can endure heavy foot traffic and exhibits greater resilience in harsh weather conditions. The lifespan of rubber resurfacing may vary, but it is generally considered longer-lasting than concrete and asphalt, often exceeding 15 years.

In comparison, concrete resurfacing also provides durability, but it can be more susceptible to cracking and chipping over time, particularly in regions with severe freeze-thaw cycles like Canada. The lifespan of concrete resurfacing can be prolonged through proper maintenance and the application of sealants, but the thin veneer of concrete will eventually fail structurally.

When considering overall durability and lifespan, rubber resurfacing holds an advantage over concrete resurfacing due to its ability to withstand impacts and adapt to diverse weather conditions.

Maintenance Comparison

Rubber Stone Maintenance: Rubber resurfacing boasts minimal maintenance needs. It resists stains, requiring only occasional cleaning with a pressure washer, mild soap, and water to remove dirt and debris. To maintain appearance and durability, resealing or applying a topcoat every 4-5 years is necessary.

Concrete Maintenance: In contrast, concrete resurfacing demands more maintenance and ongoing repairs. Porous concrete surfaces are prone to staining, necessitating regular cleaning and sealing to protect against moisture and stains. Depending on conditions and usage, concrete resurfacing may require frequent sealing, repairs for cracks or chips, and periodic reapplication of protective coatings.

Overall, rubber resurfacing offers lower maintenance requirements compared to concrete resurfacing, making it a hassle-free option for long-term surface upkeep.


Customization options are plentiful with both rubber resurfacing and concrete resurfacing but in different ways:

Rubber Resurfacing:

  • Colors: Choose from a wide range of vibrant or subtle colors to personalize your surface.
  • Patterns, Shapes, and Logos: Add unique patterns, logos, or designs to achieve a customized look.

See our photo gallery for ideas.

Concrete Resurfacing:

  • Decorative Finishes: Enhance a concrete surface with stamps, stencils, or exposed aggregates for an appealing aesthetic.
  • Color Stains: Customize your concrete surface with various stained or dyed colors for a personalized touch. (sealing must be maintained at the recommended intervals)
  • Borders: Create intricate borders, or replicate the look of natural stone, tile or concrete using various stamps.

In conclusion, rubber resurfacing excels in color and pattern choices, while concrete resurfacing provides versatility in decorative finishes, color stains, and pattern replication. Choose based on your desired aesthetic and the customization options that align with your preferences.

Environmental Impact

When evaluating the environmental impact of rubber resurfacing versus concrete resurfacing, several factors come into play:

Rubber Resurfacing:

  • Recycled Materials: Rubber resurfacing materials are made from recycled tires which reduces landfill waste.
  • Reduced Carbon Footprint: Reusing rubber materials minimizes the need for new production, resulting in a lower carbon footprint compared to concrete resurfacing.
  • Drainage and Permeability: Rubber surfaces are typically non-porous when sealed properly, aiding in stormwater management by limiting water runoff.

Concrete Resurfacing:

  • Resource Consumption: Concrete resurfacing requires new concrete materials, involving the extraction of natural resources like aggregates and cement.
  • Energy-Intensive Production: The production of concrete involves energy-intensive processes, including quarrying, transportation, and cement production, contributing to carbon emissions.
  • Landfill Waste: Demolishing existing concrete surfaces during resurfacing can generate significant waste, potentially ending up in landfills.

In terms of environmental impact, rubber resurfacing is thought to be more environmentally friendly due to its use of recycled materials and lower carbon footprint. Concrete resurfacing, on the contrary, has higher resource consumption and energy requirements. It's important to note that the environmental impact of both options can vary based on factors such as transportation distances, waste management practices, and specific manufacturing processes employed.