I'm rapidly approaching FRA (less than 6 months) and I have NO plans to take SS then or any time soon, for that matter.
Whenever I think of taking SS, I go back to two significant concepts that loomed large in my life. From my flying days, I recall always thinking in terms of altitude vs airspeed. Both were "life" as a lot of either meant you could stay in the sky a little longer in an emergency. You could trade one for the other (within limits) but you couldn't have both if the fan ever quit. Personally, I preferred to have a lot of altitude whenever flying over an area without many apparent make-shift landing strips. In my c*reer as a scientist, one could trade potential for kinetic energy (or vice versa) under the right set of circumstances (the flying examples is a specific instance of this phenomenon, but in the physical and chemical world, the concept is much broader). I always viewed taking SS as "kinetic energy" (e.g., airspeed) and waiting for SS as potential energy (altitude). I've related other places about losing an engine while flying. Whether that incident affects my SS planning, I can't say. But, unless something else changes (law, financial set-backs, etc.) I plan to take SS at 70 (I'm hoarding my altitude!) I understand there are a dozen or more ways to look at the argument for/against taking SS at a given age. For me, perhaps it's psychological, but I've always tended to prefer potential energy rather than kinetic.
This concludes today's energy symposium. Oh, and YMMV.