Pronunciation of "zounds?"

I came across the sentence "Fortunately their are a variety of different offerings out there with zounds of features." Disregarding the misuse of "zounds," how would Elizabeth I have pronounced the word? To rhyme with "God's wounds?" Or otherwise?

It makes most sense to me that zounds should rhyme with wounds. When you take two words and combine them and then contract them, they retain their pronunciation.

couldn't isn't pronounced cowdn't

doesn't isn't pronounced dow-znt

bosun isn't pronounced bossun

Nevertheless, it seems both pronunciations are ok: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/zounds, and /zaʊndz/ appears to be more prevalent: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/zounds

English is weird, eh?

EDIT: See Snumpy's answer. It started off as rhyming with wounds and changed during the Great Vowel Shift to rhyme with sounds

If it's anything like the exclamation, it would rhyme with sounds.

EDIT: It apparently has been affected by the Great Vowel Shift. Maybe someone else can provide a link to exactly how the 16th-17th century version of ou would have been pronounced.

The fact is that back when the contaction of "God's wounds" came into being and common use, the Great Vowel Shift had yet to happen in English. "Wounds" back then rhymed with "bounds" and "sounds" as pronounced today. Therefore, "zounds" also rhymed with "sounds" and "bounds" and still should today. The change in pronunciation for a "wound" in human or animal flesh occurred for that rather commonplace word, but the pronunciation of "zounds" did not change. There are a number of people who say it should be pronounced "zoonds" because "wounds" used to be pronounced "woonds," but I think they're being pedantic. On the rare occasion that I might say "zounds" for humorous effect -- since it is a rather outmoded expletive that now sounds quaint -- I'm going to continue to say it so it rhymes with "sounds" and "bounds."