In the Philadelphia Convention of 1787? Not that I recall.
Life expectancies were lower. I've buried 3 out of 4 parents/in-laws, so I have some experience watching the elderly. Modern medicine has figured out how to keep a body alive a lot longer than a century ago, but doctors have not figured out how to help the elderly to keep the mental acuity at peak or near-peak efficiency. Not every elderly person loses his/her mental acuity (I know an 93 year old who is sharp as a tack and I've known some 60 year olds whom I would not put in charge of pouring urine out of a boot with instructions written on the bottom of the heel). On average, however, octogenarians tend to be less sharp mentally than they had been in their sixties.
In the 1700s, most of those people would have died in their fifties or sixties so they did not live long enough for their brains to lose acuity. Thus "aging out" of eligibility for office was an unknown problem. At their deaths, the average age of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence was 66.
As for term limits, William Symmes in the Massachusetts state convention said this: "I have been, and still am, desirous of a rotation in office [i.e. term limits], to prevent the final perpetuation of power in the same men."
Richard Harrison of New York, on the other hand, said this about re-eligibility and ambitious politicians: "If the senator is conscious that his reëlection depends only on the will of the people, and is not fettered by any law, he will feel an ambition to deserve well of the public. (i.e. he will try to earn re-election.) On the contrary, if he knows that no meritorious exertions of his own can procure a reappointment, he will become more unambitious, and regardless of the public opinion." (i.e. will ignore public opinion).
