May I ask why you chose a BB30 frame for your next build if you don't stand fully behind the BB30 design? Plenty of other options out there.
Best BB30 explanation I've ever read:
If you look at history, when it was clear BSA needed improvement from an engineering perspective, people came up with outboard BB cups -- a half asset approach, which pushed cranks further out. Cranks became thinner laterally coz bearing cups do not leave much space for crank arms.
For example, current campy crank arms are much flatter than the square tapered version, and you have to over build the cranks to achieve the desired stiffness. That's why a whole frame is 700-1100g, and a friggin crankset has to be 600-800g.
Too much emphasis is placed on the frame, hence it gets lighter and lighter with wall thickness of around 1.5mm. But carbon cranks have much thicker walls. BBright and BB386 widens the BB shell to the max, while it's the poor old crank arms that take the most load much more directly coming from the pedals. In other words, the frame "cheated" for more (and unnecessary) width, as a result of the outboard bearing movement. Poor cranks are stuck with no room to be optimized. This is true for BB386, BB86, and BBright.
Not to mention ankle clearance and Q factor. This is unfortunate, because the industry is less integrated, and Cervelo/BH/Wilier don't know how to make a super lightweight stiff crank with thin walls. Exactly why Cannondale is so superior in this area.
On the adapters I would definitely vote for the Wheels MFG one. Used by many pro teams. Durable, creak-free and easily reversible. I believe the FSA one is not meant to be reversible and has to be loctited in the BB.
Plus BB30 bearings + WMFG adapters + crank weighs less than FSA adapter + Shimano bearings + crank