If you're in the 'red zone', as Otar describes in his book (meaning borderline whether you have the funds to make it through retirement), then a SPIA may be better for you.
An SPIA typically can be a useful tool if retiree's portfolio looks incapable of supporting bare-bones spending needs. But there are a few problems and challenges in the OPs case:
1) He's (relatively) young. At 61 YO, the mortality credits he'll receive will be small. Also, given the likely long draw period, inflation protection is even more important than if he were older--and SPIAs with inflation protection are pricey.
2) Today's interest rates have suppressed the payouts on all annuities.
It's possible that the OP may do better if he can delay annuitizing (so he can get older and in hopes that interest rates improve). In any case:
a) he is resistant to delaying his SS payments until FRA or longer, and that's a much better actuarial deal than he'll get with any commercial annuity. So, unless he sees the benefit of that, he's probably not ready to buy a commercial annuity.
b) An SPIA, along with other income (SS, etc) can help a retiree meet basic expenses. I don't know if the OP has come to a realistic appraisal of what his basic expenses need to be--a budget with a bottom-line not based on needs or desires, but based on his resources and working backward from there. It is possible that, despite today's environment, he believes his assets will grow at more than 4% real, and that he can safely withdraw 6% or more each year. If so, that would be a comforting thing to believe, it will delay the perceived need to make any drastic lifestyle cuts, and will likely hasten the day when external circumstances force involuntary cuts under less favorable conditions. We all make our own choices.
